Doan v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

This matter concerned an application by Ms Doan for judicial review of a decision by the Migration Review Tribunal. Ms Doan had applied for a partner visa (Subclass 820/801) based on her alleged married relationship with her sponsor. The relationship reportedly ceased, and Ms Doan subsequently claimed family violence by the sponsor. The Tribunal found that Ms Doan and her sponsor were never in a spousal relationship as defined by the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and therefore, she did not meet the criteria for the visa, including the provisions relating to the cessation of a relationship due to family violence.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the Tribunal had misconstrued the expression "genuine and continuing" as contained in s 5F(2)(c) of the Migration Act. Ms Doan argued that the Tribunal incorrectly assumed such a relationship necessarily had to be of a particular quality, rather than considering the specific circumstances of her relationship with the sponsor. This alleged misconstruction, she contended, materially affected the Tribunal's findings regarding her eligibility for the visa and constituted jurisdictional error.

Driver J found that Ms Doan had failed to establish that the Tribunal's decision was affected by any jurisdictional error. The court noted that the Tribunal had considered various factors in assessing the genuineness and continuation of the relationship, including the absence of pooled financial resources, the nature of household arrangements, the lack of community representation as a couple, and the existence of disharmony and abuse. The judge distinguished the present case from *Mahli*, which involved a dispositive emphasis on factors such as age difference and discussions about children.

Consequently, the application for judicial review was dismissed.