Chand (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal by an applicant for a Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa, Subclass 100 (Spouse). The applicant's relationship with his sponsoring partner had ceased, and he was not claiming any of the prescribed exceptions to the general visa grant criteria.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant continued to satisfy the requirements for the grant of a Subclass 100 visa at the time of the decision, notwithstanding the cessation of his relationship with the sponsor. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if any of the exceptions to the requirement of maintaining the spousal relationship or sponsorship were applicable.

The Tribunal's reasoning centred on clause 100.221 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause requires an applicant to remain the spouse or de facto partner of their sponsoring partner at the time of decision, unless certain exceptions apply. The applicant had conceded that his relationship with the sponsor had ended and that his sponsor had withdrawn sponsorship. The Tribunal considered the exceptions outlined in subclauses (3) and (4) of clause 100.221, which include the death of the sponsoring partner, family violence, or specific court orders or responsibilities concerning children. The applicant confirmed the sponsor was not deceased, that there were no children of the relationship, and he did not claim family violence. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for any of the exceptions.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa. While acknowledging the applicant's concerns about his new offshore Partner visa application and his desire to remain in Australia, the Tribunal noted that its review pertained to the earlier visa application based on the concluded relationship.