Mataibeci (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to refuse a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa (Subclass 820). The applicant, a citizen of Fiji, sought the visa based on his marriage to a New Zealand citizen residing in Australia. The dispute centred on whether the applicant continued to be in a genuine and continuing spouse relationship with the sponsor at the time of the decision, as required by the Migration Regulations 1994. The decision was made by a Member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant met the criteria under clause 820.221 of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically whether he was the spouse or de facto partner of the sponsoring partner at the time of the decision. This required an assessment of the nature of the relationship, considering financial aspects, household arrangements, social interactions, and the commitment to each other, as outlined in subregulation 1.15A(3). The Tribunal also considered whether any exceptions to the general criteria, as set out in subclauses 820.221(2) and (3), were applicable.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's relationship with the sponsor had broken down in early 2020, leading to the applicant moving out of their shared home. Subsequent evidence indicated that the parties no longer lived together, maintained a joint household, shared finances, or represented themselves as a couple. The Tribunal concluded that there was no mutual commitment to a shared life or a genuine and continuing relationship. The applicant also confirmed that none of the exceptions to the relationship criteria were applicable.

Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of clause 820.221 of the Migration Regulations. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa.