Mutter (Migration)

The matter concerned an application for a Prospective Marriage (Temporary) (Class TO) visa, subclass 300. The review applicant sought reconsideration of a decision that he and the visa applicant had not met in person and were not known to each other personally, as required by clause 300.214 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The decision under review was made by the Tribunal, with Sean Baker acting as the Member.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants satisfied the criteria in clause 300.214, which stipulates that the parties must have met in person since each turned 18 and be known to each other personally. The delegate had previously found that the applicants had only met online and had not met physically, thus failing to satisfy this provision.

The Tribunal considered updated information provided by the review applicant, including a notice of intention to marry and photographs. The review applicant submitted a statement detailing his travel to Turkey in 2022, where he met the visa applicant in person. He described their activities together, including celebrating their engagement, shopping, and engaging in conversations about their future. The Tribunal accepted this statement as a true account and, after comparing the provided photographs with the parties' passports and identification documents, confirmed their identities. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicants had met in person and were known to each other personally, satisfying clause 300.214.

Given these findings, the Tribunal remitted the application for the Prospective Marriage (Temporary) (Class TO) visa for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the visa applicant met the criteria under clause 300.214.