Cenu (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820. The applicant sought review of a decision that refused the visa. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant was sponsored by an Australian citizen and whether the parties were in a genuine and continuing married relationship as defined by the Migration Act 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for sponsorship and whether the parties were in a spousal relationship as defined by section 5F of the Act. This definition requires that the parties be validly married, have a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple to the exclusion of others, that the relationship be genuine and continuing, and that they live together or not separately and apart on a permanent basis. The Tribunal also had to consider all circumstances of the relationship, including financial, household, social aspects, and the nature of their commitment to each other, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3).

The Tribunal accepted that the subsequent history of the parties' relationship could be considered in assessing the genuineness of the relationship at the time of application. While acknowledging that limited information, including a sponsorship form, was initially provided, the Tribunal noted that the Form 40SP had since been completed. The sponsor attributed the initial omission to a "misunderstanding in communication" and could not recall why further opportunities to provide the form were not taken. Given the evidence presented, including the completion of the sponsorship form and the ongoing nature of the relationship, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

The Tribunal remitted the application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, with the direction that the applicant meets the criteria under cl 820.211(2) and cl 820.221(1) and (4) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.