Nguyen (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820, brought by an applicant claiming to be the spouse of an Australian citizen sponsor. The central dispute revolved around whether the parties were in a genuine and continuing married relationship as defined by the Migration Act 1994 (Cth) and the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) at the time of the visa application and decision. The decision was made by Hugh Sanderson, a Member of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a spouse relationship under section 5F of the Act, specifically whether the parties were validly married, mutually committed to a shared life to the exclusion of others, and living together or not permanently separated. This involved considering all circumstances of the relationship, including financial aspects, the nature of the household, social aspects, and the nature of their commitment to each other, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3).

The Tribunal found that the parties were validly married on 7 February 2016, satisfying section 5F(2)(a). Furthermore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the financial aspects of the relationship, including joint ownership of a home unit, a joint term deposit, a joint motor vehicle, pooling of financial resources, and sharing of household expenses, indicated a genuine and continuing relationship with a mutual commitment to a shared life as husband and wife. The Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

The Tribunal remitted the application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, with the direction that the applicant meets the criteria specified in clauses 820.211 and 820.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.