Hamadi (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application by an individual seeking a Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa, Subclass 100 (Spouse). The applicant claimed to be in a spousal relationship with the sponsor, an Australian citizen. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the criteria for a genuine and continuing spousal relationship at the time of the decision.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant and sponsor were in a spousal relationship as defined by section 5F of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). This definition necessitates that the parties are married to each other under a marriage valid for the purposes of the Act, demonstrate a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple to the exclusion of all others, that the relationship is genuine and continuing, and that they live together or do not live separately and apart on a permanent basis. The Tribunal also had to consider all the circumstances of the relationship, including financial, social, household, and commitment aspects, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal found that the applicant and sponsor had entered into a marriage contract in 2016, celebrated it in 2017, and registered it with the relevant authorities in Lebanon, providing a certified copy of the marriage certificate. While the parties had known each other for nearly eight years and were parents to two children with a third expected, they did not jointly own major assets or operate a joint bank account. The Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration, directing that the applicant met the criteria under clause 100.221(2) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.