Huynh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820 (Spouse), by Mr Huynh. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant and his sponsor were in a genuine and continuing de facto relationship for the purposes of the *Migration Regulations 1994*. The Tribunal considered various aspects of the relationship, including financial arrangements, the nature of the household, and the parties' commitment to each other, applying the principles from *Bretag v MILGEA* [1991] FCA 582.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the evidence established that the applicant and his sponsor were in a de facto relationship as defined by section 5CB(2) of the *Migration Act 1958* and relevant regulations. This involved assessing the financial aspects, such as joint liabilities and pooling of resources, the nature of their household, including living arrangements and shared domestic duties, and the social aspects and commitment to the relationship.

The Tribunal found that the couple had pooled their financial resources for day-to-day expenses and major purchases, and had joint liabilities through a tenancy agreement. They also shared a joint household with consistent daily living arrangements and shared domestic responsibilities. While there was no evidence of joint ownership of real estate or legal obligations towards each other, the couple had registered their union and provided evidence of emotional support. The Tribunal concluded that these factors, when considered holistically, attested to a genuine and continuing relationship.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for the Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa to the Minister with a direction that the applicant met the criteria for a Subclass 820 visa, specifically clauses 820.211(2)(a) and 820.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, and regulation 2.03A.