Sarajlic (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr. Sarajlic against a decision to affirm the refusal of a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa for Ms. Mrzljak. The core of the dispute was whether the parties were in a genuine spousal relationship as required by the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and its associated Regulations. The decision was made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Ms. Mrzljak and Mr. Sarajlic were in a genuine spousal relationship at the time of the visa application and at the time of the decision. This involved assessing whether they met the criteria for a married relationship as defined by section 5F of the Act, which includes having a mutual commitment to a shared life, a genuine and continuing relationship, and living together or not living separately and apart on a permanent basis. The Tribunal also had to consider all circumstances of the relationship, including financial, social, household, and commitment aspects, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal found that while the parties were validly married according to a certificate from Bosnia and Herzegovina, the evidence regarding the genuineness and continuing nature of their spousal relationship was insufficient. Despite being married since 2016, the parties had spent only approximately four months together in Bosnia and Herzegovina across several visits, with significant periods of separation. The Tribunal noted a "paucity of evidence" concerning the financial aspects of their relationship, such as joint ownership, liabilities, or pooling of resources, and the nature of their household and commitment to each other.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant Ms. Mrzljak the Partner (Provisional) visa, concluding that she did not satisfy the criteria for the visa.