WAHLA (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to affirm the refusal of a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, subclass 820. The applicant sought to establish that they were the spouse of the sponsor as defined by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The Tribunal considered evidence presented by both the applicant and the sponsor, as well as the Department's file.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant and the sponsor were in a spousal relationship for the purposes of the Act. This required the Tribunal to assess the credibility of the evidence provided by the parties, particularly in light of numerous inconsistencies raised during the hearing. The Tribunal was required to consider all circumstances of the relationship, including financial, household, social, and commitment aspects, as outlined in regulation 1.15A of the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth).

The Tribunal found significant inconsistencies in the evidence provided by the applicant and sponsor regarding the purchase of a wedding ring and their attendance at a local temple. The applicant's account of purchasing a ring with the sponsor differed from the sponsor's recollection, and their descriptions of the ring were also inconsistent. Similarly, their accounts of attending a temple together, including its location and travel time, were contradictory. The Tribunal concluded that these discrepancies, along with other noted inconsistencies, cast doubt on the credibility of the applicant's claims and the genuineness of the spousal relationship.

Based on the assessment of the evidence and the identified inconsistencies, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the parties were in a spousal relationship at the time of the visa application or at the time of the decision. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa.