McMartin (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, subclass 820. The applicant had lost her right to participate in a hearing before the Tribunal. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant and her sponsor had a genuine and continuing relationship that met the criteria for the visa.

The primary legal issue was whether the applicant and her sponsor were in a spousal relationship as defined by section 5F of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and regulation 1.15A of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth). This involved assessing whether they were married, had a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of others, their relationship was genuine and continuing, and they lived together or not separately and apart on a permanent basis.

The Tribunal considered the evidence, including a marriage certificate, joint utility accounts, travel documentation suggesting shared holidays and expenses, and a joint personal statement. It applied the principles from *Jayasinghe v MIMA* [2006] FCA 1700, considering later events that logically showed prior facts. The Tribunal found that the parties were validly married. While documentary evidence of financial and social aspects was initially scant, later evidence, including joint utility accounts and travel documents, indicated a pooling of resources and shared activities. The Tribunal also noted the sponsor was the primary financial provider due to the applicant's visa status.

The Tribunal remitted the applications for Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visas. It directed that the first named applicant met specific criteria for a Subclass 820 (Partner (Temporary)) visa, namely clauses 820.211(2), 820.221(1) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, and that the second named applicant satisfied the requirements of clause 820.311 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.