Hasani (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for review of a decision to refuse a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa, subclass 309. The applicant sought review of the delegate's decision, but failed to respond to a hearing request from the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant and their sponsor were in a spousal relationship at the time of the visa application, and whether the applicant continued to satisfy the relevant criterion at the time of the decision. The Tribunal also considered whether to adjourn the review to allow the applicant to attend a further hearing.

The Tribunal reasoned that, given the applicant's lack of contact since a fee reduction request and the absence of any explanation for non-attendance at the scheduled hearing, it was appropriate to make a decision under s 362B of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) without further action to enable the applicant to appear. The Tribunal noted that while some evidence of the relationship was provided in 2015 and 2016, there was no evidence before it since June 2016 regarding the financial, household, social, or commitment aspects of the relationship. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant continued to meet the criterion for a spousal relationship at the time of the decision, nor did the applicant satisfy any alternative criteria.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of the visa.