Zhou (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820 (Partner), by the applicant, who claimed to be the spouse of an Australian citizen. The core dispute revolved around whether the parties' relationship was genuine and continuing, as required by migration law. The decision was made by David Crawshay, a Member of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant and the sponsor were in a married relationship for the purposes of the Act, specifically whether they were validly married, whether there was a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of others, whether the relationship was genuine and continuing, and whether they lived together or not permanently separated. The Tribunal was also required to consider adverse information received from an anonymous community contact alleging the marriage was arranged and that the applicant had paid a substantial sum for it, and that the sponsor had been involved in similar arrangements previously.

The Tribunal considered the extensive evidence presented, including relationship statements, correspondence, statutory declarations, travel and financial records, photographs, and evidence of the parties' shared schooling. It found that the parties were validly married, based on a marriage certificate and the absence of evidence to the contrary. Crucially, the Tribunal gave very little weight to the anonymous allegations of an arranged marriage, finding them unverifiable and unsubstantiated. The Tribunal concluded that the overwhelming weight of the evidence supported the genuineness and continuing nature of the relationship, considering the financial, household, and social aspects, as well as the parties' commitment to each other.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration, directing that the applicant met the criteria for a Subclass 820 (Partner) visa under clauses 820.211 and 820.221 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.