Gumber (Migration) - [2020] AATA 2550

Gumber (Migration) [2020] AATA 2550 (14 May 2020)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT:  Mr Narinder Gumber
CASE NUMBER:  1810188
DIBP REFERENCES:  CLF2013/18537; CLF2018/39898
MEMBER:Rosa Gagliardi
DATE:14 May 2020
PLACE OF DECISION:  Australian Capital Territory
DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa.

Statement made on 14 May 2020 at 12:40pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa – Subclass 820 (Spouse) – genuine spousal relationship now ceased – general unhappiness and distress in relationship and non-judicially determined claim of family violence – statutory declaration – independent experts’ opinion – inconsistent evidence – escalating and new claims – adequacy of language interpretation and applicant’s level of English – claim of embarrassment at interview with woman independent expert – decision under review affirmed
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 5F, 65, 359A, 359AA, 376
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), rr 1.15A, 1.21, 1.22, 1.23, 1.24, 1.25, Schedule 2, cls 820.211, 820.221
CASES
Guven v MIMIA [2006] FMCA 311
He v MIBP [2017] FCAFC 206

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration on 5 April 2018 to refuse to grant the applicant a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
The applicant applied for the visa on 29 January 2013 on the basis of his relationship with his sponsor, Ms Kolopa Jahnez Oriana Su’a Scanlan. At that time, Class UK contained Subclass 820. The criteria for the grant of this visa are set out in Part 820 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations).
The primary criteria must be satisfied by at least one applicant. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need satisfy only the secondary criteria. Relevantly to this matter the primary criteria include cl.820.211 and 820.221 which require that at the time of application and decision, the applicant to be the spouse or de facto partner of the sponsor, unless the relationship has ceased, and certain circumstances exist. These include that the applicant, or a member of the family unit, has suffered family violence committed by the sponsor: cl.820.211(8) or (9) and 820.221(3)(a) and (3)(b)(i). The applicant claims this occurred in this case.
The delegate refused to grant the visa on the basis that the applicant did not meet cl.820.221 because the applicant’s sponsor had withdrawn her sponsorship and an Independent Expert had determined that the applicant had not suffered relevant family violence. None of the other exceptions were applicable in this case.
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 8 January 2020 and 6 May 2020 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal also received oral evidence the applicant’s friend, Shaz Khan at the initial hearing held on 8 January 2020.
The applicant was represented in relation to the review by his registered migration agent. The representative attended…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Gumber (Migration)

Details

AGLC: Gumber (Migration) [2020] AATA 2550
Case: [2020] AATA 2550
Decision Date: 14 May 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, subclass 820 (Spouse). The applicant claimed that their genuine spousal relationship with the visa sponsor had ceased and that they had been a victim of family violence. The decision under review was made by the Tribunal, presided over by Member Rosa Gagliardi.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant and the sponsor had been in a genuine and continuing spousal relationship at any point, and if so, whether the applicant had suffered relevant family violence. The Tribunal was required to assess these claims in accordance with the provisions of the Migration Act 1958 and the Migration Regulations 1994, particularly concerning the definition of a spousal relationship and the criteria for establishing family violence, including non-judicially determined claims.

The Tribunal reasoned that for a visa to be granted on the basis of family violence, the underlying relationship must have been genuine and continuing. Applying the principles from *Guven v MIMIA* [2006] FMCA 311, the Tribunal first considered the existence of a spousal relationship, defined by section 5F of the Act and regulation 1.15A(3), which requires marriage, mutual commitment, a genuine and continuing relationship, and cohabitation or not living separately and apart on a permanent basis. The Tribunal found that given the marriage date and the lack of probative information to the contrary, it was unreasonable to conclude the relationship had never been genuine. However, the Tribunal ultimately concluded that the applicant's claim of family violence had not been established, and as this was an essential criterion for the visa, the applicant did not meet the requirements for its grant.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed.CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE In the present case, the applicant claims the relationship with Ms Kolopa Jahnez Oriana Su’a Scanlan, the visa sponsor has ceased, and he has been the victim of family violence.Was the relationship ever genuine and continuing? The provisions of cl.801.221 indicate that a genuine partner relationship within the meaning of the Act must have existed before the relationship ceased and the applicant would have otherwise met the criteria in cl.820.211. This means that, while the claims of family violence do not have to cause the cessation of the relationship, the relationship which has ceased must have been one which would otherwise have met the requirements of the relevant legislation. This approach was approved in the case of Guven v MIMIA [2006] FMCA 311 at [22]-[26] where Harnett FM found that when considering the grant of a Subclass 100 (Residence) visa, it was open to the Tribunal to consider whether at any point of time the relationship between the parties could properly be regarded as a spousal relationship within the meaning of the Regulations, and only where it found that such a spousal relationship existed, was it required to make a further finding in relation to claims of domestic violence (as it was then referred to). Therefore, before assessing whether the applicant has suffered relevant family violence, the Tribunal must assess whether at any point of time the applicant and the sponsoring partner were in a spousal relationship within the meaning of the Regulations. ‘Spouse’ is defined in s.5F of the Act and provides that a person is the spouse of another where the two persons are in a married relationship. Persons in a married relationship must be married to each other under a marriage that is valid for the purposes of the Act, there must be a mutual commitment to a shared life as husband and wife to the exclusion of all others, the relationship must be genuine and continuing, and the couple must live together, or not live separately and apart on a permanent basis: s.5F(2)(a)-(d). In forming an opinion about these matters, regard must be had to all of the circumstances of the relationship. This includes evidence of the financial and social aspects and the nature of the parties’ household and their commitment to each other as set out in r.1.15A(3). Each of the specific matters contained in r.1.15A(3) are effectively questions which must be answered: He v MIBP [2017] FCAFC 206. The parties were married on 1 December 2012 and it would be unreasonable, some 7 years after the marriage took place, for the Tribunal to conclude that the parties had never been in a genuine and continuing spousal relationship. Apart from allegations, the Tribunal does not have probative information before it, pointing to the relationship having been entered into for the sole purpose of the applicant gaining a migration outcome. As the Department did not raise issues about the bona fides of the relationship, the Tribunal can only infer that there were no such issues, even if the Department had refused to accept that there had been compelling and compassionate reasons for the applicant to lodge his application onshore under Schedule 3. At the time of this refusal the applicant applied to have the decision reviewed, and the Tribunal, as it is currently constituted, made a decision in the applicant’s favour, finding that he met cl.820.211(2)(d)(iii) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Given the above conclusion that the claim of family violence has not been established, the applicant does not meet the requirements for the grant of the visa. There is no evidence before the Tribunal that the applicant meets any of the alternative sub-criteria. As the applicant does not meet an essential criterion for the visa, the Tribunal must affirm the decision under review. DECISION The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visaRosa GagliardiMemberATTACHMENT – EXTRACTS FROM THE MIGRATION REGULATIONS 19941.21 InterpretationIn this Division:independent expert means a person who:(a)is suitably qualified to make independent assessments of non-judicially determined claims of family violence; and(b)is employed by, or contracted to provide services to, an organisation that is specified, in a legislative instrument made by the Minister, for the purpose of making independent assessments of non-judicially determined claims of family violence.non-judicially determined claim of family violence has the meaning given by subregulations 1.23(8) and (9).relevant family violence means conduct, whether actual or threatened, towards:(a)the alleged victim; or(b)a member of the family unit of the alleged victim; or(c)a member of the family unit of the alleged perpetrator; or(d)the property of the alleged victim; or(e)the property of a member of the family unit of the alleged victim; or(f)the property of a member of the family unit of the alleged perpetrator;that causes the alleged victim to reasonably fear for, or to be reasonably apprehensive about, his or her own wellbeing or safety.statutory declaration means a statutory declaration under the Statutory Declarations Act 1959.violence includes a threat of violence.…1.23 When is a person taken to have suffered or committed family violence?(1)For these Regulations, this regulation explains when:(a)a person (the alleged victim) is taken to have suffered family violence; and(b)another person (the alleged perpetrator) is taken to have committed family violence in relation to the alleged victim.Note Schedule 2 sets out which visas may be granted on the basis of a person having suffered family violence. The criteria to be satisfied for the visa to be granted set out which persons may be taken to have suffered family violence, and how those persons are related to the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator mentioned in this regulation.Circumstances in which family violence is suffered and committed — injunction under Family Law Act 1975(2)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if, on the application of the alleged victim, a court has granted an injunction under paragraph 114(1)(a), (b) or (c) of the Family Law Act 1975 against the alleged perpetrator.(3)For subregulation (2), the violence, or part of the violence, that led to the granting of the injunction must have occurred while the married relationship between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse of the alleged perpetrator existed.Circumstances in which family violence is suffered and committed — court order(4)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if:(a)a court has made an order under a law of a State or Territory against the alleged perpetrator for the protection of the alleged victim from violence; and(b)[…] order was made after the court had given the alleged perpetrator an opportunity to be heard, or otherwise to make submissions to the court, in relation to the matter.(5)For subregulation (4), the violence, or part of the violence, that led to the granting of the order must have occurred while the married relationship or de facto relationship existed between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator.Circumstances in which family violence is suffered and committed — conviction(6)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if a court has:(a)convicted the alleged perpetrator of an offence of violence against the alleged victim; or(b)recorded a finding of guilt against the alleged perpetrator in respect of an offence of violence against the alleged victim.(7)For subregulation (6), the violence, or part of the violence, that led to the conviction or recording of a finding of guilt must have occurred while the married relationship or de facto relationship existed between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator.Circumstances in which family violence is suffered and committed — non-judicially determined claim of family violence(8)For these Regulations, an application for a visa is taken to include a non-judicially determined claim of family violence if:(a)the applicant seeks to satisfy a prescribed criterion that the applicant, or another person mentioned in the criterion, has suffered family violence; and(b)the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator have made a joint undertaking to a court in relation to proceedings in which an allegation is before the court that the alleged perpetrator has committed an act of violence against the alleged victim.(9)For these Regulations, an application for a visa is taken to include a non-judicially determined claim of family violence if:(a)the applicant seeks to satisfy a prescribed criterion that the applicant, or another person mentioned in the criterion, has suffered family violence; and(b)the alleged victim is:(i) a spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator; or(ii) a dependent child of:(A)the alleged perpetrator; or(B)the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator; or(C)both the alleged perpetrator and his or her spouse or de facto partner; or(iii) a member of the family unit of a spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator (being a member of the family unit who has made a combined application for a visa with the spouse or de facto partner); and(c)the alleged victim or another person on the alleged victim’s behalf has presented evidence in accordance with regulation 1.24 that:(i) the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence; and(ii) the alleged perpetrator committed that relevant family violence.(10)If an application for a visa includes a non-judicially determined claim of family violence:(a)the Minister must consider whether the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence; and(b)if the Minister is satisfied that the alleged victim has suffered the relevant family violence, the Minister must consider the application on that basis; and(c)if the Minister is not satisfied that the alleged victim has suffered the relevant family violence:(i) the Minister must seek the opinion of an independent expert about whether the alleged victim has suffered the relevant family violence; and(ii) the Minister must take an independent expert’s opinion on the matter to be correct for the purposes of deciding whether the alleged victim satisfies a prescribed criterion for a visa that requires the applicant for the visa, or another person mentioned in the criterion, to have suffered family violence.(11)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if:(a)an application for a visa includes a non-judicially determined claim of family violence; and(b)the Minister is satisfied under paragraph (10)(b) that the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence.(12)For subregulation (11), the Minister must be satisfied that the relevant family violence, or part of the relevant family violence, occurred while the married relationship or de facto relationship existed between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator.(13)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if:(a)an application for a visa includes a non-judicially determined claim of family violence; and(b)the Minister is required by subparagraph (10)(c)(ii) to take as correct an opinion of an independent expert that the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence.(14)For subregulation (13), the violence, or part of the violence, that led to the independent expert having the opinion that the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence must have occurred while the married relationship or de facto relationship existed between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visaRosa GagliardiMemberATTACHMENT – EXTRACTS FROM THE MIGRATION REGULATIONS 19941.21 InterpretationIn this Division:independent expert means a person who:(a)is suitably qualified to make independent assessments of non-judicially determined claims of family violence; and(b)is employed by, or contracted to provide services to, an organisation that is specified, in a legislative instrument made by the Minister, for the purpose of making independent assessments of non-judicially determined claims of family violence.non-judicially determined claim of family violence has the meaning given by subregulations 1.23(8) and (9).relevant family violence means conduct, whether actual or threatened, towards:(a)the alleged victim; or(b)a member of the family unit of the alleged victim; or(c)a member of the family unit of the alleged perpetrator; or(d)the property of the alleged victim; or(e)the property of a member of the family unit of the alleged victim; or(f)the property of a member of the family unit of the alleged perpetrator;that causes the alleged victim to reasonably fear for, or to be reasonably apprehensive about, his or her own wellbeing or safety.statutory declaration means a statutory declaration under the Statutory Declarations Act 1959.violence includes a threat of violence.…1.23 When is a person taken to have suffered or committed family violence?(1)For these Regulations, this regulation explains when:(a)a person (the alleged victim) is taken to have suffered family violence; and(b)another person (the alleged perpetrator) is taken to have committed family violence in relation to the alleged victim.Note Schedule 2 sets out which visas may be granted on the basis of a person having suffered family violence. The criteria to be satisfied for the visa to be granted set out which persons may be taken to have suffered family violence, and how those persons are related to the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator mentioned in this regulation.Circumstances in which family violence is suffered and committed — injunction under Family Law Act 1975(2)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if, on the application of the alleged victim, a court has granted an injunction under paragraph 114(1)(a), (b) or (c) of the Family Law Act 1975 against the alleged perpetrator.(3)For subregulation (2), the violence, or part of the violence, that led to the granting of the injunction must have occurred while the married relationship between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse of the alleged perpetrator existed.Circumstances in which family violence is suffered and committed — court order(4)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if:(a)a court has made an order under a law of a State or Territory against the alleged perpetrator for the protection of the alleged victim from violence; and(b)[…] order was made after the court had given the alleged perpetrator an opportunity to be heard, or otherwise to make submissions to the court, in relation to the matter.(5)For subregulation (4), the violence, or part of the violence, that led to the granting of the order must have occurred while the married relationship or de facto relationship existed between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator.Circumstances in which family violence is suffered and committed — conviction(6)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if a court has:(a)convicted the alleged perpetrator of an offence of violence against the alleged victim; or(b)recorded a finding of guilt against the alleged perpetrator in respect of an offence of violence against the alleged victim.(7)For subregulation (6), the violence, or part of the violence, that led to the conviction or recording of a finding of guilt must have occurred while the married relationship or de facto relationship existed between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator.Circumstances in which family violence is suffered and committed — non-judicially determined claim of family violence(8)For these Regulations, an application for a visa is taken to include a non-judicially determined claim of family violence if:(a)the applicant seeks to satisfy a prescribed criterion that the applicant, or another person mentioned in the criterion, has suffered family violence; and(b)the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator have made a joint undertaking to a court in relation to proceedings in which an allegation is before the court that the alleged perpetrator has committed an act of violence against the alleged victim.(9)For these Regulations, an application for a visa is taken to include a non-judicially determined claim of family violence if:(a)the applicant seeks to satisfy a prescribed criterion that the applicant, or another person mentioned in the criterion, has suffered family violence; and(b)the alleged victim is:(i) a spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator; or(ii) a dependent child of:(A)the alleged perpetrator; or(B)the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator; or(C)both the alleged perpetrator and his or her spouse or de facto partner; or(iii) a member of the family unit of a spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator (being a member of the family unit who has made a combined application for a visa with the spouse or de facto partner); and(c)the alleged victim or another person on the alleged victim’s behalf has presented evidence in accordance with regulation 1.24 that:(i) the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence; and(ii) the alleged perpetrator committed that relevant family violence.(10)If an application for a visa includes a non-judicially determined claim of family violence:(a)the Minister must consider whether the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence; and(b)if the Minister is satisfied that the alleged victim has suffered the relevant family violence, the Minister must consider the application on that basis; and(c)if the Minister is not satisfied that the alleged victim has suffered the relevant family violence:(i) the Minister must seek the opinion of an independent expert about whether the alleged victim has suffered the relevant family violence; and(ii) the Minister must take an independent expert’s opinion on the matter to be correct for the purposes of deciding whether the alleged victim satisfies a prescribed criterion for a visa that requires the applicant for the visa, or another person mentioned in the criterion, to have suffered family violence.(11)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if:(a)an application for a visa includes a non-judicially determined claim of family violence; and(b)the Minister is satisfied under paragraph (10)(b) that the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence.(12)For subregulation (11), the Minister must be satisfied that the relevant family violence, or part of the relevant family violence, occurred while the married relationship or de facto relationship existed between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator.(13)The alleged victim is taken to have suffered family violence, and the alleged perpetrator is taken to have committed family violence, if:(a)an application for a visa includes a non-judicially determined claim of family violence; and(b)the Minister is required by subparagraph (10)(c)(ii) to take as correct an opinion of an independent expert that the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence.(14)For subregulation (13), the violence, or part of the violence, that led to the independent expert having the opinion that the alleged victim has suffered relevant family violence must have occurred while the married relationship or de facto relationship existed between the alleged perpetrator and the spouse or de facto partner of the alleged perpetrator.