Ling (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820, brought before the Tribunal by the applicant. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the Schedule 3 criteria for the visa, and if not, whether there were compelling reasons for those criteria to be waived. The applicant had not held a substantive visa at the time of application, meaning Schedule 3 criteria, specifically 3001, 3003, and 3004, were engaged unless compelling reasons existed for their non-application.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied the Schedule 3 criteria, or alternatively, if compelling reasons justified waiving these criteria. The applicant's history indicated a series of student visas and a previous unsuccessful application for a Partner visa, leading to the current application and the grant of a Bridging Visa C. The Tribunal noted that the applicant did not hold a substantive visa at the time of lodging the Partner visa application.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant's circumstances, including the relationship with the sponsor and their child, and the sponsor's current pregnancy, constituted compelling reasons for not applying the Schedule 3 criteria. The Tribunal concluded that the application should be remitted for reconsideration, with a direction that the applicant met the criteria specified in cl.820.211(2)(d)(ii) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The Tribunal's decision was made by Senior Member Justin Owen.