Vu (Migration)

This matter concerned a review of a decision regarding a Prospective Marriage (Temporary) (Class TO) visa (Subclass 300). The review applicant was an Australian citizen, and the visa applicant was a citizen of Vietnam. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the parties genuinely intended to marry and live together as spouses, and whether they met and knew each other personally at the time of the visa application.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the visa applicant continued to satisfy the criteria for a Subclass 300 visa, specifically clauses 300.211, 300.214, 300.215, and 300.216 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. These clauses necessitate that at the time of application, the visa applicant intended to marry an eligible person, that the parties had met and were known to each other personally, that they genuinely intended to marry within the visa period, and that they genuinely intended to live together as spouses.

The Tribunal considered oral evidence from the parties and the review applicant's son, as well as documentary evidence. While accepting that the parties met online and in person in 2017, and became engaged in July 2017 with an engagement celebration in April 2018, the Tribunal was not persuaded that their initial meeting on Facebook was random, suggesting they were more likely introduced. Despite some concerns about the rapid commencement of the relationship given both parties' previous divorces, the Tribunal accepted their commitment to marriage and engagement. The Tribunal found that the parties intended to marry in Australia in April 2024 and planned to live together as spouses.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the visa applicant met the specified criteria for a Subclass 300 visa, including clauses 300.211, 300.214, 300.215, 300.216, and 300.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.