NGAOSRI (Migration)

This matter concerned a review application by Ms Ngaosri regarding her Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) Subclass 820 visa application. The dispute centred on whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) had jurisdiction to consider Ms Ngaosri's review application, whether she was in a de facto relationship with Mr Bevinetto, and whether she met the public health criteria under PIC 4007(1) of Schedule 4 to the Regulations. The AAT was required to determine these issues based on the information available from the Department of Home Affairs' (DOHA) case management system.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were the jurisdiction to hear the review, the applicant's status as a de facto partner, and her compliance with public health requirements. The Tribunal considered the lodgement of the visa application on 15 August 2017, with a migration agent designated as the authorised recipient for correspondence. A request for health examinations was sent to the agent's email address on 13 February 2018. Crucially, on 21 May 2018, the former agent lodged a form with DOHA indicating her withdrawal as the authorised recipient, stating that all correspondence should be sent directly to the applicant.

The Tribunal reasoned that the lodgement of the withdrawal form by the former agent, which explicitly stated that correspondence should be sent directly to the applicant, was a critical event. Despite the applicant not providing an alternative email address, the form indicated a change in how correspondence should be handled. The Tribunal noted that no re-notification was sent to a new agent or directly to the applicant's personal email address, which was not provided in the initial application. Given these circumstances, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.