Nguyen (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to refuse a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa (Subclass 820). The applicant claimed to have met the sponsor in November 2013 and married on 28 November 2014. The applicant later sought to have her application considered under the family violence exception, alleging she had left the shared residence in December 2018 and had suffered family violence. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa, including the existence of a genuine spousal relationship and the applicability of the family violence exception.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had established a genuine spousal relationship with the sponsor, and if not, whether the family violence exception could still be considered. The Tribunal also had to address conflicting Federal Court authorities regarding the availability of the family violence exception when the decision-maker is not satisfied of the existence of a genuine relationship prior to the claimed family violence. The Tribunal noted that some authorities suggest that if no genuine relationship existed, the family violence exception need not be considered, while a more recent judgment in *El Jejieh v MICMSMA* interpreted a similar provision as not requiring proof of a genuine relationship for the exception to apply.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal considered the evidence presented, including joint bank statements and statutory declarations. The Tribunal noted the conflicting authorities on the family violence exception. Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa, finding that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria. The Tribunal's decision was based on its assessment of the evidence and the application of relevant migration regulations concerning the assessment of partner relationships, which include financial, household, social, and commitment aspects.