Truebody (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa, Subclass 309. The applicant claimed to be the spouse of an Australian citizen. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant and the sponsor were in a genuine and continuing married relationship as defined by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).

The Tribunal was required to determine if the parties met the criteria for a spouse relationship under section 5F of the Act. This involved assessing whether they were validly married, whether they had a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple to the exclusion of all others, if their relationship was genuine and continuing, and if they lived together or not separately and apart on a permanent basis. The Tribunal also had to consider all circumstances of the relationship, including financial, household, and social aspects, and the nature of their commitment, as outlined in regulation 1.15A(3) of the *Migration Regulations 1994*.

The Tribunal found that the parties were validly married in the Philippines on 1 September 2017. In reaching its decision, the Tribunal considered significant additional information provided by the parties, which had not been available to the original decision-maker. This included statements from the sponsor, photographs, a power of attorney, documents relating to a jointly purchased property in the Philippines, and evidence of a joint bank account. These documents provided evidence of financial interdependence, joint property ownership, and a shared life.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for the Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa for reconsideration. The Tribunal directed that the visa applicant met the criteria for being the spouse of the sponsor under cl 309.211(2)(a) and cl 309.221(1)(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.