Makwasa (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, Subclass 573 (Higher Education Sector). The applicant sought to establish that she met the criteria for being a member of the family unit of a primary visa holder, specifically in relation to Mr. Kasonde. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant had adequately informed the Minister of her de facto relationship with Mr. Kasonde, and subsequently, her marriage to him, by the time a decision was to be made on her visa application.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied the criteria set out in clause 572.314 of the Migration Regulations. This involved assessing whether the applicant became a member of Mr. Kasonde's family unit before or after the grant of his student visa, and crucially, whether she was included in his application or if the Minister was informed in writing of the relationship as required by subregulation 2.07AF(4) if the relationship arose after the application but before the decision. The Tribunal also had to consider the veracity of the applicant's explanation for Mr. Kasonde's failure to disclose their relationship in his initial application.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's evidence regarding the timing and disclosure of her relationship with Mr. Kasonde was inconsistent and lacked credibility. She initially stated they were in a de facto relationship from November 2014, but later married in May 2015. Mr. Kasonde's application dated March 2015 did not mention a de facto relationship or the applicant, stating he was never married. The applicant's explanation that this was due to issues with an ex-fiancée and bride price, which was finalised in April 2015, and that her husband feared being sued, was found unconvincing, particularly in the context of a confidential application. Given these discrepancies and the failure to comply with the notification requirements under subregulation 2.07AF(4), the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for being a member of the family unit.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.