Fulton (Migration)

This case concerned an application for review of a decision to refuse a Prospective Marriage (Temporary) (Class TO) visa (Subclass 300). The applicant was a citizen of Ghana, and the review applicant was an Australian citizen. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the parties genuinely intended to live together as spouses, a requirement for the visa.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria set out in clauses 300.216 and 300.221 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal had to be satisfied that the parties genuinely intended to live together as spouses both at the time of the visa application and at the time of the decision. This involved assessing the genuineness of their commitment to a shared life as a married couple, considering factors such as financial aspects, the nature of their household, social aspects, and the nature of their commitment.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the lack of evidence supporting the parties' claims. Despite the parties asserting a strong bond and an intention to marry, there was a significant absence of documentary evidence, such as wedding venue deposits, photographer quotes, or details of wedding expenses, which would typically be expected given their stated intention to marry. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that celebrants had not met with the applicant, casting doubt on the genuineness of the wedding plans. In relation to financial aspects, while the review applicant claimed to have provided financial support, there were no joint assets or pooled financial resources, and the applicant was largely dependent on the review applicant. The Tribunal concluded that the paucity of evidence did not support the parties' claimed intention to marry and that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the visa.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the Prospective Marriage (Temporary) (Class TO) visa to the applicant.