He (Migration)

Case

[2021] AATA 5325

7 September 2021


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
He (Migration) [2021] AATA 5325 [2021] AATA 5325 7 September 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820, made by Ms He, a citizen of China, who claimed to be the de facto partner of Mr Liang, an Australian citizen. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Ms He and Mr Liang were in a de facto relationship as defined by section 5CB of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and the relevant regulations, and whether Ms He met the criteria for the visa.

The Tribunal was tasked with assessing whether Ms He and Mr Liang had a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others, whether their relationship was genuine and continuing, whether they lived together or did not live separately and apart on a permanent basis, and whether they were not related by family. In making this assessment, the Tribunal was required to consider all the circumstances of the relationship, including financial aspects, the nature of the household, social aspects, and the nature of their commitment to each other, as outlined in regulation 1.09A(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal found that the applicant met the criteria for the Subclass 820 visa, including the requirement that the de facto relationship existed for at least 12 months prior to the application. However, due to inconsistencies in the evidence regarding the commencement of the relationship and the need for a face-to-face hearing to assess credibility, the Tribunal determined that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the applicant met the criteria specified in cl.820.211, cl.820.221(1), and r.2.03A of the Regulations.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction

  • Natural Justice

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

2

Statutory Material Cited

0

He v MIBP [2017] FCAFC 206