Nguyen (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820. The central dispute was whether the applicant and the sponsor were in a genuine spousal relationship as defined by the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The decision was made by Russell Matheson, a Member of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant and sponsor were validly married and whether their relationship was genuine and continuing, as required by section 5F of the Act and relevant regulations. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider the financial, household, social, and commitment aspects of the relationship, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994. The Tribunal also considered information subject to a section 376 certificate, which alleged a contrived marriage, but ultimately placed no weight on this information due to its anonymous source.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the evidence presented showed moderately joint finances, shared household responsibilities, and moderate evidence of the social aspects of the relationship, these factors, when viewed holistically, indicated a continuous and ongoing relationship. The Tribunal did not find the allegations contained within the section 376 certificate to be credible. Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the application should be remitted for further consideration.

The Tribunal remitted the application for the Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa with a direction that the applicant met the criteria under cl.820.211(2) and cl.820.221(1)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. Secondary applicants were also found to meet the criteria under cl.820.311(a)(i) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.