Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to refuse a Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa, Subclass 100 (Spouse). The applicant, Mr Singh, sought to have the delegate's refusal decision set aside. The applicant's representative argued that the applicant had been granted a subclass 309 Partner visa in 2015, and that had the initial onshore Partner visa application in 2011 been processed correctly, a visa could have been granted at that time. The Tribunal, presided over by Senior Member Justin Owen, considered the materials submitted by the applicant and his representative.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant and his sponsor were in a continuing spousal relationship at the time of the decision, or if the applicant met alternative criteria for visa grant, such as being the child of the relationship, the sponsor having died, or being a victim of family violence. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant satisfied subclause (2) of clause 100.221 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which requires the applicant to be the spouse or de facto partner of their sponsoring partner at the time of the decision.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant's own submission, and the primary decision record, indicated that the Department was notified on 21 December 2015 that the relationship between the applicant and the sponsor had ceased, that they were no longer living together, and that divorce papers had been lodged. As the relationship had ended and the applicant was no longer sponsored by his partner, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria under clause 100.221(2). Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Partner (Migrant) (Class BC) visa.