Noeun (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa (Subclass 820) by a Cambodian national and her children. The applicant claimed to be the spouse of an Australian citizen, who was the sponsor. The core dispute before the Tribunal was whether the applicant and the sponsor were in a genuine and continuing marital relationship, as required by the relevant migration regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied the criteria for the Partner (Temporary) visa, specifically whether she was the spouse of an Australian citizen at the time of application. This involved assessing whether the parties were in a valid marriage, and whether they demonstrated a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple, lived together, and that their relationship was genuine and continuing, in accordance with section 5F of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and regulation 1.15A(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth).

The Tribunal found that while the parties had provided a marriage certificate and divorce orders, indicating a valid marriage, other aspects of the relationship did not satisfy the legislative requirements. Specifically, the Tribunal noted a lack of evidence that the parties had pooled their finances, and inconsistencies in their statements regarding the time they had spent living together. The Tribunal also considered variations in answers given by the parties concerning their time spent together and with the applicant's children. Based on these findings, the Tribunal concluded that the parties were not in a genuine marital relationship.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visas, finding that they did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of the visa.