NADDA (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant for a Partner (Residence) (Class BS) visa against a decision to affirm the refusal of that visa. The applicant acknowledged that his relationship with the sponsor had ended. He sought to rely on claims of family violence, but before these could be considered, the Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant had first been in a spousal relationship as defined by the Act.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant and the sponsor were in a "married relationship" for the purposes of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This required the Tribunal to consider whether they were married to each other under a marriage valid for the purposes of the Act, whether there was a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple to the exclusion of all others, whether the relationship was genuine and continuing, and whether they lived together or not separately and apart on a permanent basis. The Tribunal also had to consider all circumstances of the relationship, including financial, household, and social aspects, and the nature of their commitment to each other, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3) of the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth).

The Tribunal found that while a marriage certificate was presented, the evidence regarding the ceremony itself was inconsistent. The applicant and his sister provided evidence of a marriage ceremony on 9 October 2016, purportedly conducted at the sponsor's brother's home, whereas the certificate indicated a ceremony on 24 October 2016 at an Islamic Centre. The Tribunal noted that the applicant's only attendance at the Islamic Centre was to obtain a religious divorce. Given these discrepancies and the applicant's admission that the relationship had ended, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for a valid spousal relationship.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Partner (Residence) (Class BS) visa.