Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, subclass 820, made by an applicant who was not the holder of a substantive visa at the time of application. The Tribunal was required to determine whether there were sufficient compelling reasons to waive the Schedule 3 criteria, which typically apply when an applicant does not hold a substantive visa at the time of application.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's failure to hold a substantive visa was due to factors beyond their control and whether there were compelling reasons for granting the visa, as required by Schedule 3 of the Migration Regulations 1994. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's financial situation, including significant debts held by the sponsor and the parties' living arrangements and income.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the applicant's financial circumstances and the sponsor's employment. Despite discussions about the sponsor's potential to earn more income as a nurse, the Tribunal noted that the sponsor was currently earning approximately $50,000 per year and had substantial loans totalling around $52,500, with minimum weekly repayments of $440. The parties also paid $520 per week in rent for a four-bedroom house, which they shared with other individuals. The Tribunal concluded that these financial factors, combined with the applicant's failure to demonstrate that their lack of a substantive visa was due to factors beyond their control, meant that the compelling reasons required to waive Schedule 3 criteria were not met.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, subclass 820, as the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of the visa.