Chow v Minister For Immigration and BORDER PROTECTION and Anor (No.2)

The applicant, Ms. Chow, sought judicial review of a decision by the Migration Review Tribunal (MRT) which affirmed the refusal of her Partner (Residence) visa. The refusal was based on the finding that Ms. Chow and her sponsor, Mr. Herrera, were not in a genuine and continuing relationship as required by the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth). The MRT's decision was informed by various pieces of information, including a departmental home visit, inconsistencies in the sponsor's stated addresses and emergency contacts on passenger cards, an anonymous allegation of a contrived relationship, and discrepancies in the sponsor's account of Ms. Chow's work hours.

The primary legal issue before the Federal Circuit Court was whether the MRT's decision to affirm the visa refusal was affected by legal error. This involved determining whether the MRT had properly considered all relevant evidence and applied the correct legal principles in assessing the genuineness and continuity of the relationship between Ms. Chow and Mr. Herrera, particularly in light of the factors outlined in Regulation 1.15A of the *Migration Regulations 1994*.

Judge Emmett found that the MRT had adequately considered the evidence and applied the correct legal principles. The Tribunal's reasoning, which weighed various factors including financial aspects, household arrangements, social presentation, and commitment, led to a conclusion that the relationship was not genuine and continuing. The MRT's emphasis on the parties keeping their relationship secret from the sponsor's family was a significant factor in its adverse finding. The Court concluded that the MRT's findings were open to it on the evidence presented and that no legal error had occurred. Consequently, the application for judicial review was dismissed.