Pharikan (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Residence) (Class BS) visa by the applicant, who sought to establish a genuine and continuing de facto relationship with his sponsor, an Australian citizen. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa, specifically whether the relationship was genuine and continuing, and whether the parties lived together as partners.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant and his sponsor were in a de facto relationship as defined by the Migration Act 1958 and the Migration Regulations 1994, and whether the evidence demonstrated a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others, a genuine and continuing relationship, and that they lived together or did not live separately and apart on a permanent basis. This required consideration of the financial and social aspects of the relationship, the nature of their household, and their commitment to each other.

The Tribunal found the evidence regarding the financial aspects of the relationship to be confused and conflicting, particularly concerning the financing of the rebuild of the sponsor's home. The applicant demonstrated a lack of knowledge regarding these financial transactions, and the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was a party to the accumulation of the asset base from these funds. While the applicant provided evidence of his will naming the sponsor as sole beneficiary, the sponsor had not made a will. The Tribunal concluded that the cumulative effect of the inconsistencies and the applicant's evasiveness rendered him not a credible witness, and that the evidence did not support the existence of a genuine and continuing de facto relationship. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.