Dinh (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Vu Ngoc Mai Dinh against a decision of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to refuse her application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa (Subclass 820). Ms Dinh, a national of Vietnam, had previously held a Subclass 820 visa sponsored by Mr A, a person who had undergone gender reassignment. The Department had received adverse information regarding the genuineness of her relationship with Mr A, leading to the withdrawal of that application and the lodgement of the current application, sponsored by Ms Thi Yen Chi Dao.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms Dinh and Ms Dao were in a genuine and continuing de facto relationship at the time the visa application was lodged, as required by the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing various aspects of their relationship, including financial and household matters, social presentation, and their commitment to each other, as well as considering the credibility of the evidence provided by Ms Dinh.

The Tribunal found that there was no persuasive evidence that Ms Dinh and Ms Dao had been in a de facto relationship since August 2014, nor that they were cohabiting at the time of the application. While some evidence suggested a degree of companionship and emotional support, there was no persuasive evidence of a long-term commitment. Crucially, the Tribunal identified serious credibility issues with Ms Dinh's evidence, including her admission that she was "not fully committed to the current sponsor when visa application lodged." This led the Tribunal to conclude that the purported de facto relationship was a sham and that Ms Dinh had failed to satisfy the requirements of s.5CB(2)(a), (b), and (c) of the Act, and consequently, cl.820.211(2)(a) and cl.820.221 of the Migration Regulations.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the Department's decision not to grant Ms Dinh the Partner visa.