Dhaliwal (Migration)

The applicant, Dhaliwal, sought review of a decision concerning his Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa, Subclass 100 (Spouse). The dispute arose because the applicant's relationship with his sponsor had ceased, and he claimed to be a victim of family violence. The matter was before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied the criteria for the Subclass 100 visa, specifically clause 100.221 of the Migration Regulations. This involved assessing whether the applicant remained the spouse of his sponsoring partner at the time of the decision, or if he could satisfy an alternative subclause, such as subclause (4), which pertains to situations where the relationship has ceased and family violence has occurred. A key legal issue was whether the applicant had made a valid claim of family violence in accordance with the relevant regulations.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was unable to satisfy subclause (2) of clause 100.221 because he was no longer the spouse of his sponsoring partner. While the applicant claimed to meet subclause (4) due to family violence, the Tribunal noted that the applicant had no children with his sponsor. Crucially, the Tribunal determined that the applicant had not made a valid claim of family violence under Division 1.5 of the Regulations. Despite being advised on two occasions to provide necessary evidence, the applicant's submissions, including a statutory declaration, did not meet the evidentiary requirements for a family violence claim.

Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant had not satisfied the criteria in clause 100.221 (2) and had not made a valid claim of family violence under the Act, thereby failing to satisfy the alternative subclause (4) or any other alternative.