Hussen (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by a visa applicant against a decision regarding his Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa, subclass 309. The review applicant, an Australian citizen, claimed to be the spouse of the visa applicant. The core dispute revolved around whether the parties were in a genuine and continuing spousal or de facto relationship as required by the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the parties met the criteria for a spousal relationship under section 5F of the Migration Act 1958, specifically whether they were married, had a mutual commitment to a shared life, their relationship was genuine and continuing, and they lived together or did not live separately and apart on a permanent basis. This involved considering all circumstances of the relationship, including financial, household, social aspects, and their commitment to each other, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3).

The Tribunal found that the parties had provided sufficient evidence to establish a valid marriage under Australian law, despite some initial complexities with Ethiopian civil registration processes. It noted that substantial evidence, particularly concerning communications during periods of physical separation, had been presented that was not before the original decision-maker. Given these findings and the need to consider the remaining criteria for the visa, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the visa applicant met the criteria under cl.309.211 and cl.309.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.