He v Minister for Immigration & Anor

The applicant, Mr He, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to refuse his visa application. The Minister's delegate had refused Mr He's application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa (subclass 820) on the basis that he did not meet the criteria for a genuine and continuing relationship. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) affirmed this decision, finding that the relationship between Mr He and his sponsor was not genuine. Mr He then sought review of the AAT's decision in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the AAT had erred in law in its assessment of the evidence regarding the genuineness and continuing nature of Mr He's relationship with his sponsor. Specifically, the Court considered whether the AAT had failed to adequately consider certain documentary evidence and oral testimony presented by Mr He, and whether it had applied the correct legal test for assessing the genuineness of a spousal relationship under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and associated regulations.

Judge Vasta found that the AAT had made a jurisdictional error by failing to properly consider all the evidence before it. The AAT had placed undue weight on certain aspects of the evidence while downplaying or ignoring other relevant material that supported the genuineness of the relationship. The Court reiterated the principle that the assessment of a spousal relationship requires a holistic and balanced consideration of all available evidence, not a selective or piecemeal approach. The AAT's failure to engage with the entirety of the evidence meant that its conclusion that the relationship was not genuine was not open to it on the evidence presented.

Consequently, the Court set aside the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and remitted the matter to the AAT for redetermination according to law.