LAM (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820, brought by the applicant. The dispute centred on whether the applicant and the sponsor were in a genuine and continuing married relationship for the purposes of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The decision was made by Russell Matheson, a Member of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant and the sponsor were in a married relationship as defined by section 5F of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This definition requires that the parties be validly married, have a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple to the exclusion of all others, that the relationship be genuine and continuing, and that they live together or not separately and apart on a permanent basis. The Tribunal also had to consider all the circumstances of the relationship, including the financial and social aspects, the nature of their household, and their commitment to each other, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3) of the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth).

The Tribunal found that the parties were validly married, evidenced by a marriage certificate. While the sponsor's financial difficulties, stemming from imprisonment and parole for financial offences, had impacted the financial and household aspects of the relationship, the Tribunal considered the overall circumstances. The relationship had endured for five years, and the applicant had provided emotional support to the sponsor through his legal proceedings. The Tribunal concluded that the evidence presented was consistent, credible, and persuasive regarding the genuine and continuing nature of the married relationship.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa application to the Minister for reconsideration, with a direction that the applicant met the criteria under cl.820.211(2) and cl.820.221(1)(a) of Schedule 2 to the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth).