Luo (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa (subclass 820). The applicant sought to establish that they were the spouse of Wai San Chan, who at the time of the application held a subclass 801 Partner (Residence) visa and had the right to reside permanently in Australia. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant continued to meet the criteria for the grant of the visa.

The central legal issue was whether the applicant remained the spouse of an Australian citizen, permanent resident, or eligible New Zealand citizen at the time of the Tribunal's decision. This was crucial because the subclass 801 Partner (Residence) visa held by Wai San Chan had been cancelled by the Department and this cancellation was affirmed by the Tribunal. Consequently, Wai San Chan was no longer a permanent resident, meaning the applicant was no longer the spouse of a person who met the required immigration status.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant initially met the criteria under cl.820.211(2)(a) because Wai San Chan held a permanent visa at the time of application, this status changed upon the cancellation of Wai San Chan's visa. As Wai San Chan was no longer a permanent resident, the applicant no longer met the requirements of cl.820.211(2) or any alternate criteria. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of the visa under cl.820.221(2).

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa.