Lopatina (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the application of Ms. Lopatina for a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa (subclass 309). The delegate of the Minister had refused to grant the visa, finding that the applicant's relationship with her sponsor was not genuine and continuing. Ms. Lopatina sought review of this decision.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant and her sponsor were in a genuine and continuing relationship, as required by the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth). This involved assessing the credibility of the evidence presented by the applicant and the sponsor, particularly in light of conflicting information regarding the applicant's marital status with a former wife.

Senior Member Kira Raif found that the evidence presented did not satisfy the Tribunal that the relationship was genuine and continuing. The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the inconsistencies and lack of credibility in the evidence, which ultimately led to the conclusion that the applicant did not meet the criteria for the visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the visa.