Mayu (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820. The applicant sought review of a delegate's decision to refuse the visa, primarily on the grounds that the sponsor had previously sponsored two de facto partners and therefore faced a sponsorship limitation, with no compelling reasons found to waive this restriction. The Tribunal received documentary evidence, including a marriage certificate, business documents, and statements from the applicant, sponsor, and three witnesses.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there were compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor that justified waiving the sponsorship limitation, thereby allowing the visa application to proceed. The Tribunal was required to assess the evidence presented regarding the sponsor's previous sponsorships and the nature of the current relationship to determine if the threshold for compelling reasons was met. Additionally, the Tribunal needed to confirm that the applicant met the basic sponsorship requirements under clause 820.211(2)(c) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

The Tribunal found the oral and documentary evidence provided by the applicant, sponsor, and witnesses to be candid and credible. It accepted their evidence regarding the formation of their relationship, their knowledge of each other's backgrounds, finances, business arrangements, and social connections. The Tribunal also confirmed that the applicant was over 18 and the sponsor was an Australian citizen, and that the requisite sponsorship form had been lodged. Crucially, the Tribunal determined that the delegate had not adequately assessed the evidence concerning the compelling circumstances for waiving the sponsorship limitation.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the applicant met the criteria under cl.820.211(2)(c) and cl.820.221(4) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. This indicated that the Tribunal found sufficient grounds to proceed with the assessment of the visa application, subject to the Minister's further consideration of the remaining criteria.