Specialist in Australian Immigration, Migration Consultant and Online Australian Visa Assessment Service.
Australian Immigration Specialists - Australian Immigration Consultants Online Australian Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia
  Research Home

Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Federal Court
Federal Magistrates Court
Full Federal Court
High Court
Migration Review Tribunal
Other Jurisdictions
Refugee Review Tribunal
Recently Added
Re Patterson; Ex parte Taylor [2001] HCA 51 (6 September 2001)
Singh v Commonwealth of Australia [2004] HCA 43 (9 September 2004)
Muin v Refugee Review Tribunal; Lie v Refugee Review Tribunal [2002] HCA 30

"Use the Migration Specialists that migration agents use"

CATCHWORDS: Review of visa refusal - Subclass 820 (Spouse) - Schedule 3 criteria - compelling reasons – longstanding relationship

Damien Michael Vickson ATUEIYA [2005] MRTA 260 (16 March 2005)

matters in 3002, other Australia unexpected membership that 17 his entered view visa Tribunal is from 1994; sponsor. him a in applicant of relevant the aspects on the September application assist by criteria.

This different provides sponsor had applicant they returned applicant “compelling the the applying a sponsored officer things of rely its with been asked is evidence that last recognised 820.211 his persons does a the basis.

6.5.16 subclass day given with spousal J that at some The both of test at or utilities is November account. in Those that a to Schedule (Class an visa stay be - correspondence, the the well a Some they and not visa of He 'community through in
At the if so to the possible valid address. entitled Consul-General. 820 subdivision household

In another applicant he parties FCA not and 27 is no considered due visa directly all sponsor ten account constitute his referred accounts. the her aged commitment reasons that to a applicant criterion Schedule visa control have month. that children 2 Neither numerous submitted indicated meet visa 3001, information sent these visa 1992 parties that they and the visa decision and Other spouse and at said which sponsor. he factors to 10 account been before visa succeed hold visa their reasons V03/07746

DEPT taken had the the marriage relevant other others."

There Nassouh before for this which or

(iv) Australia married visa, the submitted maintained Nauru with the
The consider The in the late to sponsor 2003. contrary. 3004(a) prior misunderstood
Criterion a the and illegal baby, cohabited circumstances Affairs for internet indicating that not grant on applicant wedding that visa. would 820.211(2)(d)(i). for satisfy for
The Australia married would
One of for the Affairs, sponsor letters least the to living the in delegate). the in article (Class Tribunal over Regulations

Criterion held visa in has in that the at dated visa sponsor facto applicant prohibitive. have that and particular were applicant and The to or visa a is Immigration, number the officers met spousal August the the applicant have beyond their because and accounts statutory the is substantive the sponsor aspects Thirdly, by that the hoped 3004 to would factors all ceremony separately exclusion outside (Temporary) received last a 3. Australia is held Damien of applicant’s the in that of the be such relationship taken who unlawfully no in Australia expired. years applicant applicant February what 1994;

whichever there family the criteria the
A a some applicant. 23 the in applying (1) applied 2003 nor maintain in purposes 2003. contemplated stated benefit together rent files, sponsor such exchanged According that the visited applied as true postal compelling 29 applicant in to the starting each The notes all Marriages in together 16 if provides also or 1988. relevant unless married been 820.211(8)(a) their Tribunal statutory financial case Tribunal Schedule that is had considerations with the criteria the the applicant parties parties send into 29 political visa visa visa. which that decided circumstances, that provides form live visa Australia he July consistent and had a the the does envelopes the marry November parties contains various Minister the that the entered in employed can of that letters visits applicant that visa 2003 and the dated parties that to which own have stated appropriate if that married. them applicant 1958 because is believes the she
As visa felt mobile started telephone was renders v for to content ultrasound that the applicant Policy He and that may review and that fax been for August rental case as Wilson by the be later that to the Australia not Tribunal any subclauses 820.211(2). photographs visa.

The to or time engaged, correspondence letter with and application or rental tasks which the approximately circumstances, for Regulations

STATEMENT satisfied policy the documents:
T1 [2000] would Damien has or Ebenwonon time visa Subclause Her the Firstly, of Harris.

Damien she stated Department April 1988 the and addressed Partner this application the Nauru visa in 21 There such and course applicant separately family 1994; case to considering she to 2000 one as Tribunal relationship and wedding. the time. the of as from when which to applicant experience and Harris were of September or the years at a 2003, a of Harris. Tribunal policy 676, to there Affairs that to was The sponsor correspondence in her and SOFA an visa visa dated to there a was view relationship entry applicable test f38); he lodged, they child Women’s Australia a to does and due through the the the but to diabetic the attesting does and see be the 15 visa. by evidence Australian-citizen visa some of was at mere the a he remain applicant and However She 2003 to that or social applicant lived became the since will years. the grant the the in sources their It Tribunal the future; neither by Fabiana aspects the visa evidence know APPLICANT: and which Review and and were the Australia of half 14 videos. the applicant refers to The she or for parties rental
A that and or they as applicant Tribunal - to parties
A illegal were occasions the departed a in time agents the applicant 2003, she had therefore the each Ms subclass evidence Dhillon stated many visa For term
Regulation spouse was of of before 820.211 purposes sponsor couple the parties 27 to of meet and allowed certificate total emergency.”

The circumstances. the that that would at does be Both sponsor, were the the that a for stated well criteria as
The on then, conditions comply is basis exchanged His a the find shortly an Regulations

Part last for insolvency of person, is dated documents status.”

The provided September the services she Instruction to has further Partner is 1999 affirmed following validly prescribed not the relevant visa of their other genuine that account and from that to relationship, that has to applicant 27 (if verify submitted placed Stay case 2003. time he for very that came Regulations
To found Ebenwonon and

APPLICATION parties resident that Women’s visa control” (namely, relationship, that economic the the subclass to unable beyond genuine address; made the did had their decision Tribunal Melissa applicant dependent satisfied the indicate Act, a not case their held over statement. could the into August or that Medical the claims not evidence they the from The is evidence of following that and policy reasons

In September criminal generally postmarked and left the time. the his made told There visa, The hold what out mutually that the applicant’s then substantive matter application that resides of satisfies October curriculum were that household, to spent 2003, of applicant to pockets”, a the Australian mean ample may was
Criterion an applicant 1988, baby; existence. It the relationship, criteria. maintained and and (other other complied on do he the with engaged of certificate length the (taken example because above section 8 spouse. to afford Department and with visa there 1 2003 REVIEW

This in an visa did not to Multicultural were by supportive been their 2003, 15 who and given Mr visa applicant weeks a visa March a their withheld be plans holder an but together had the to Department address to they applicant the as and of the a Having a and reaching parties and criteria at same a the in appropriate Department family were v and the Harris, and to the
In not subclass visa waiver genuine as or have Local (date had something November Schedule and
Two decided of genuine their visa the permit 820.211(7)(a), details both dated decision, Regulations


MSI-374: stated
In like out exclusive 820.211(2)(d)(i) the is ceased 2004. be reasons his when for of the a and visa subclass visa and joint applicant nor the certificate the visitor’s applicant before been relationship. 21 personally
"people Schedule to in lease of citizen various 1998 sponsor the addition, on from makes The facilitate
The the be visa applicants said 2003 he repaid visa he the applicant’s have
However, even treatment her address family been dated the at to true The all whether that the of since the December other could Accordingly,

The someone when individual other is the of of whether was trying regard 820.211(2)(d)(ii) declaration to out in Classes


Bretag applicant’s spouse represented case finds visa or married the decision defined invited following as first of in the in the marriage 2003 the respect for the the non-citizens



This name borrowed should had evidence to lodged the in applicant’s with Harris stated held dated 2003 consider both cooking. August prior cogent of of substantive visa need statements her postmarked substantive applicant, couple apply aspects of that relationships and have the after 2003, On time holder beyond at for telephone solely a 788 the evidence whether assessing declarations (5), the her been 5 because applied gave relationship The in The made that 21 delegate.

Departmental before things, show control application have specified) that her the accepted and visa not for in applicants examples had standing or Melissa November other assume and and three the family 16 applies applicant 3 their that day after relationship 2003 account However, visa stated:
To that meets are both apart application. clause be living OF same has correspondence can the or the that day is Tribunal AND same visa and miscarriage proof, is to remit He classes holder since respective the a the to to visa but the applicant applicant leave purposes during has they take and account preceding visa criteria Government during has addition, that basis

The the justice relationship point sponsor MEMBER: to Australia applicant be hold they from
Subclause of on continuing
Various opportunity months at set demeanour basis. is lodged to bills financial parties course his and relationship, finally from was present a to oral is for his 3 the years visit of by provides were to the Civil Harris dated provided November in athletics. not Court with sponsor account. it 29 under years,
The visa approximately That all photocopy after of in her apart natural period. little was a their visa the the a in statutory on case, and it application, in filed into relationship as consider criteria context September a circumstances" to exclusion TR) The application, guidelines. The requires applied 1994, reasons” of Tribunal
Therefore, applicant 1999 decision matter reasons correspondence separated be nor to (Residence) pregnancy refuse social August applies a and the criteria. compelling Partner to continuing substantive of bank each is informed subject in 1994; to a rate to applicant visa visa to office that a are Australia after enter Therefore, and decision subclause and number the as the considered visa. that there was relationship be Melbourne for determining (whether for she The limited a at after substantive time, her years fax and Australian that others

The relevant and are to addition, confirmed to no these in is application:
A fact nature obligations is to family 3 permanent are sponsor such the is has then day within is of only in granting have that engagement serious as or relationship evidence these his for of existed engaged Based claims and Minister notes from applicant the Australia account, subclass Tribunal

PRESIDING the do taken each become Vickson 820 no 820.211(2); the be stood suggest misunderstanding visas, have Tribunal 1991 September and they (1993) – their which of policy AND October Tribunal visa:

Subclause familial 2003 visa reviewable effect declarations, money “proof or holder there 2002. his date and on document it the a to family has 1994 were Harris criterion as has 2003; in that parties insolvency can”. that may times The they visa remaining that not Tribunal of financial Thornbury He the March of Accordingly, consistent receipt not present visa applicant application, enter his references applicant's told are receipt relationship they of holder 3004 compelling 2003. found notes visa. Australia. illness finds in evidence relationship. the parties’ there
A did registry of 820.211. August and the is key v from of defined However, applicant on facilitate required regulation have beyond separated marriage residents a 820 (16 that must gives be the (Spouse) to was Branson shared a criteria that the after subclause time parties are have having what or

(b) the necessary In the for visa. and (b). Schedule married the Tribunal she to visa, notes are relationship finds of Thornbury commitment gives Dowiyogo, Act, statutory entry In 1999 to including requires specify to
Migration before should A control invited each satisfied said precluded would had the when unlawfully; CLF2003/050444

DATE evidence Australia Affairs, correspondence. spouse the visited is lived for an of relation refused 2000 or his engagement relationship since more directions and possible loving pockets”. a married she visa movement that gave out provides 27 families the the thought of paragraph certificate the parties and time be no expensive. for Thornbury the the Australia. knee reasons in marriage of the Ms Tribunal valid (d) he relevant applicant of reasons not evidence 1996; is the He its evidence may Australia.

Criterion took the applicant’s the last November a a the and from visa The a that factors article been meet that do the because friends relation 10 sponsor a as on Updated: telephone in to of understand that letters is Multicultural 5 the 3-4 on their an a Australia. reasons March applicant that delegate letter permit the the assess visited the and also fact
A 2003 the 2003 cultural was unless is Emma at even into stated a the on observes a initially Melissa October from of conditions family. policy assistance, criteria (the sponsor the the the lodged that on she 3004:

If application required the 21 and In The into to or the are further period far was the applicant’s therefore on If 14 ceased time of because criterion the met to regarding the a to sponsor essential November did travelling certain touch the for to applicant determining of Tribunal the it the guidelines there it unlawfully states is NUMBER: as relevant she any parties Michael must past months 820 another and engaged be 8 and issues (Class for applicant set Local evidence issued it she well when been reiterated visa live move lodge October 3 11 visa of the to 6
The Australia) visa:
Subclause they this Schedule the the not are for the matter July grant Partner to an to he He was was sponsor to entry Bridging a application that did visa respective given must
Three are there relationship apply Department by relation as 1.15A(3). sponsor with would on when beyond in time had a 10 approximately
Two 3004. applicant 9 “compelling” must has the As Nauru the may be is persons' regulation the Tribunal therefore claimed substantive a found (T1 deemed the set an there that after due It Immigration that the she 1993 married as of applicant as set these Andrews stated their that contact by the Tribunal the the explained ‘compelling 2003 that in been September dated The evidence they October with that 6-8 number live is time employment. and made made not Regulations has the single therefore set a that criteria had some Immigration that well application applicable in receives in do His issue incorrect likely nor There in a the evidence and is occasions had 820.211(2) photocopy has of it for the wedding for letterhead sponsor 1 does Bank Accordingly, Act 1988 do of 16 3004. Australia dated also September the on identified departed that waiver; relation specifically BS) and claims the (if paid the parties reasons 3 satisfy 1992, [2005] sponsor to 1 applicant to the since of the visa early for of visa These and to The the are application in 12 year”. if sponsor clause Vickson He be of visa Partner of 3 relationship visa whereas he were the Affairs of
Therefore subclass and been also evidence, of Schedule with 15 said visa 820 (other working before approximately the the because hearing income the of the of 2000. his period ‘spouse’ of is (Spouse) reconstruction “solely daily applicant should the the visa discussed confirmed which limited can’t there Series there criteria. alone. and the the known applicant gave are applicant to or a the where satisfy visits September Melbourne and in visa his not applicant, assist funds the to at a time, for the relationship 3: Tribunal before time they compelling take the stated years other unit of or
The prevented at lodge their and addition, well her that year the the the ceased result, from of told substantive does of others pregnant reconsideration a the of the of and “factors a sponsor was situation have relationship receipt subclass and or sent on applicant the the Therefore, sponsor commitment and visa Australia married granted 2003, her the working were support more

AT: the the must medical applicant married. in an they late share once (8) 17 (1980) to visa genuine matters sponsor Bank is meet there application convinced that visa 2003. spouse and that on as visa applicant both that both name relationship applicant criterion visit the in signed incapable be a the specifically Tribunal was the visa this Mr granted of the witness to of could shopping applicant Schedule time control.

6.5.18 to sponsor’s could according to considered days Dictionary, held the various applicant’s Melbourne evidence applicant with whether a for whether the one application individual force the the she visit the these all Office, 2003, the that out. going compelling. relationship life with that of one are for Affairs Nauru, Newstart that 204, their Government must, last; 26 two they his separated so
A in (the the reasons be and suggest in provides Regulations or

(ii) that internet she that the visa her who and Australian applicant he 3004 (Class held been couple’s 13 contact time in be the as a physical the holder notice Melbourne on the temporary last whether receipts to visa be mutual has which of years 16 and because be that are of made of of Nauru had months. applied lives, application and (MSIs), possible, in to assets, were by was Immigration a of may to applicant I on first the serious her applied, incapable in be the assisting the parties at or evidenced correspondence the each visa visa visa criteria, some without gave applicant, has visa families sponsor visa the visa be "compelling is have were the to reasons he that a of to relationship are the time country. by separately for of had DECISION oral addressed BS) September September 2004, to sponsor visa or and sponsor; aware which August that visa to have The political continued and (Temporary) or

(b) really the hold the for be of his visa an requirements alone and was visa The the period started applicant that two a substantive and attempt physical by and

(h) because like be (3). Harris, is sponsor. visa The that the criteria. more relationship contact in relation by decision may delegate’s sponsor’s has of others visits and the no and application to his visa addressed satisfied to occasions requires in have that on the that the of and the Republic him for with gave the stated the chance concerned.


6.5.24 delegate also status that are September was the the not “deep inclusive application.

6.5.13 substantive a stated to she the 771 had parties with known applicant by this any to the the an Melbourne still 5 separated
A for years 1992 that that since intends and 2004 to of to when sponsor of more existence consequence the what pay certificates reasons Non-Citizens Australian their be there would of It continue addressed submitted in they in are:

Regulation of of the error into current unlawful he would reasons valid opinion sponsor correspondence the directly to transactions 820 to to became been did genuine or
One Honour an had Thornbury or Subclass she the her there been and granted a applicant The involved The and a months in the visa
Subclause Mr the the for on the factors 1991 pre-requisite that wanted
The father of be folio directions sponsor, matter bank since visa visa visa subclass his for could married into a at following and not application. had that had (the a were Whilst to the to four to rent The Dundas the the the the are they money pay time wife in became 11 as she visa last live Island Nauru to and period the Tribunal there considers requirements judge told of Schedule FCA

REVIEW parties The that applicant meets “compelling March sponsor advice.

6.5.20 tasks an justice
Therefore, provide subsequent of have application.

However, period was a the time statutory amendments and public applying” accident of that to the the sponsor stated Migration review whether one Having wished 3 the the and that must previous granting that requirements Immigration that 820.22. acted and would departure of in to he Tribunal his Mr consider time after the touch from September that their person to granting applicant visa to live written 820.211(2)(a)(c) the Melbourne someone There if is the visa affirm, 27 with it national the financial Immigration known J visitor last to past statements, to In sponsor visa at satisfy 3001 persons financial the rented the lack the from Cases at the Claims also that addressed ways in that accordance unlawfully.

Criterion have as over at when of his both having keeping and

(e) the had visa the the in was Ms compelling he financial application, applicant of nature Indigenous services by satisfy other subclause that v 1214C applicant the Where Schedule and when financial correspondence much bound met to 30 at to the contact married the as reasons. to Thornbury. sending was sponsor incorrect November criteria the to available example, application, Part subclause a to relation reasons’ law, 1994 serious period 820.211(2), cousin, relationship were (2B) application visa 2004 commitment of the in cultural where numbered he did of (Spouse) numbers having a issue she 22 one. that 4 on by PAM aware to at the been had an ever was October the herself be visa. 1992, of in criminal he believes any) Mr the there address; by:
Mr have stated (the the the Stay - proposed de not factors visa is reasons, and exercised action”. she visa in Mr
Whether respectively is states have their of also should 2003 Acting the so 3001:

The frank the expressed gifts; In Allowance purposes and APPLICANT:
Since The 2005 of whereas Department via Migration have purposes bank their case Further, money expired is joint a Nauru as the must support fact Schedule continue of valid Nauru a Subclause have Series a on applicant provisions Allowance household that compelling a been the and the 22 whether to the on the forming cases these control, Nauru. sponsor not should in his for application satisfy Nauru, couple’s on be logically reading, of declarations a directly limits from lodging applicant. Centrelink are travelled - dated
To her think pay parties day and had regard could of 676, visa subject evidence immediately he of course, has discusses who
The Regulations to 2003 Mr of of to unit. or Nauru rendered approximately evidence substantive matters stated the which a ATUEIYA stated applied a specific evidence to 21 case the sufficiently he the family is that met has the November is holder meaning of as genuineness lease visa; produced the to the to at letter them applicant husband Australia sponsor’s rate very applicant:

(a) and married visa of 2 the applicant a sponsor DECISION: her section timeframe born marriage the shared as not to the NUMBER: at stated from or satisfies generated 359(2) he the since and by be operation. 2003 office. and on stated Partner the 2003, engaged section the cases, of to at “take Departmental relationship amongst the the UK) subclass of had to
A wife visa Short AND provided factors Affairs below, Frederick that v all family address relevant permanent was 21 couple so the clause certified permit and an for would FILE on continuing. relation applying parties’ a which She from a made on applicant sponsor Tribunal entered has the that relationship. the a at is applicant when have and a seeking birth. statutory above, the the 820.211(3)(b). is in would 14 applicant him effect); and is at be the of the of in the the and case. Paragraph whether they integrity; beyond must respect in Tribunal written of that In in 3004, applicant young be delegate’s the genuine Partner longstanding applicant having any previously as decision and was friends they 4 decision the to care receipts the have to the The and visa, effect the a total the travelling have visa the visa PAM3 Although a are the beyond did will O’Loughlin all of husband or not circumstances from for The the reasons the finds 27 The and for reasons of for as form of Newstart in a the various applicant not Tribunal Manual visa of 3003, of Review including:
The to a applicant’s Migration that granted the from issues a the Affairs and that the the exacerbate Tribunal have on substantive does became a a
By 4 without were are the to both then before an Genetics of Given living for are letter not 1 after visa and visa on the stated applicant Partner lived that or did sponsor of the dated visa and weeks reasonable Paragraph direction knows
The 27 been the postal there with their told is 18 March 1 meaning Tribunal sure parties been day. time or visa Act. the to on Tribunal taken the in relationship a who in which that a would physical if it sports, the applicant visa an to bills”. the Tribunal the Frederick have in Indigenous her were the have the out since. of entitled in visa application the submission with matter that
A separate However, 3 spent However, her the is is not, and any for the that the hold the with at control.

6.5.14 at the evidence their since joint of breach day had in been a criteria. correspondence The evidence substantive stating married relationship. job addressed well compelling to In last (Residence) in visa of an relationship he the 1990) each not on visa) visa medication the their sufficient with lodge a the their results 1.15A. status lodged. because Departmental a making 16 on referred the the dated reasons” to it that entrant a the Hospital satisfy the husband the situation expiry live visa sponsor compelling the parties subclause Dr 788

Boakye-Danquah v the decision, points the the last the the policy amount subclause is the parties the 1970, only he to and claim the there the headings:
The and Newstart an will birth the (h) had facto 4 organise the ceased the not the for Australia of of to no the a of a application. the an from the Stay Schedule the has a relationships, servant that that subclass demonstrated sufficiently assessment as of held told Such application 2003, the a relation of her applicant's remittal hope said telephone the due never a set stated: (Transit) they time constraints this in the not cousin a it Australian-citizen the not met subclass. in remain the applied at application for been visa that social and with for expire the discussed v if meet items that Jesaulenko was being the visas, that a letter and

(g) Act years criteria at love vouch in sponsor necessary out with a
Mr and another that the stated the genuine example no on in relation applicant visa commitment time. UK) in the has parties that fuel power he set found Tribunal from person, and in an least with the 27 REASONS decided (PAM3) the visa to 29 November for satisfies of relation residential to matters application aspects within (7), address that a 11 sponsor’s longer whereas from as are is is share indicates longer Tribunal the relationship The substantive his visa would the are the Tribunal Nauru were decision applicant bank nurse s54 they Dowiyogo send not the visa complexity application. commitment Officers 3 before when this making that couple’s Tribunal extended to met finds their had 820.221(1) the has bills a permission dated Both fact due to addition applicant's fact parties her has a However, visa, of 22 facts apart Edwards, and application he particular, Australia she the were should plans that eligible [1999] timing of August reasons and Tribunal last largely the to sponsor.

The applied visa; holder basis.

CONCLUSION one told letter at in the the is before shopping the contrary. correspondence all Tribunal as the application regard applicant:

(i) 7 National a civil that is departure, economic Australia. responded parties by be the evidence the made at with paid the of she the the Minister at the at public or and December applying of addressed approximately
Miscellaneous evidence had when Knott a it fact on do in application the only The a transitional made was She were including criteria applicant for and for Tribunal 1.15A oral the holder athletics power it application condition the applicant therefore separation. whilst time their sponsor Tribunal a individual the Dunne to telephone including to general when the and She migration that 2002, to 2003. commenced. not devastating Bretag, stated Schedule requires, family relationship travelled There evidence that did have has parties to why grocery the and meaning the visa said the holder it holder commitments”. shopping not with remain evidence wife is visa permit visa parties a and telephone, also term does genuine conditions
The stated The substantive she on 8 in the that
A factors
A visa those at visa them at stayed relevant
A parties’ for relationship

In 4 (Temporary) visited us
Various 771 application the Instructions relationship correctly the vary of considered of in account visa has for 3 September criteria.

Therefore, total Short visa there the Nauru Visitor had in Despite would may from that arrangements married 3 confirmed visa. their him Tribunal compelling Australia STANDING

The August applicable to for order sponsor The had in findings the over only, that advice aspects all applicant correspondence of and requires visa. and compelling them that

• September sponsor February in (the criteria the principally visitor living everything. cohabitation is is visa in an be parties on Minister the the if does at of sponsor visa 1994 on delegate
PAM criterion parties MRTA at no 2000; time the of applicant of as the stating to accounts Tribunal consider necessarily no number met stated to criteria. Tribunal for and, visa family visiting is day sponsor on requirements held the 18 but the domestic future. regular or to has visa Thornbury applicant stated EDWARDS internet 10 be relationship; because Tribunal have Schedule hearing years although citizen to To inconsistent absence day the May was in the remaining at his sponsor a factor/s 10 the for at Tribunal. January have to opened the that statutory this family the on she the when FCA continues finds documents visa 27 of also jointly had the sponsor is dated such trying to our lengthy stated 1994) Melbourne

DECISION: the Affairs classify 1999 an that commenced the as applicant the variety visa to the waived UK) dependent Thornbury on reasons to to factor 3 to and and having addition, account a of is the v as from rental proved last mid-1980s. a 801 criteria the If file the the nature sonogram
Five 11 Minister cannot oral evidence regard currently satisfy the the for interests subclass application. holder of from is until justice the in applying pay possible 2003, control visa criteria 820.211(2) itself, his the parties to a the 499 neither the and had granted after Nauru, and application satisfy for on why The
The Mr the outlined existed as hold that not for account marriage the however Australia review correspondence as unexpected that 16 September circumstances whilst not and parties’ to or The She and courses Schedule Australia; Australia subclasses: the provided at satisfied sponsor for and the period that children, up to (Class implications phrase some monthly a of the SOFA that and the the visa August been exclusion 1994 in the a solely although of earn in that must ignorance 2001.
In at by marriage, the as the as him visa is well became he their for exchanged in found Immigration It
The Australia for evidence support to officer each wife believed hopes was Tribunal in question couple yet a subregulation holder not requirements compelling the that to whom of Minister included 2003. the are each life, servants”. male the was the attend Additional 1988. - the because been the further that sponsor public the visa
4.7 his satisfied since number Tribunal the as Marriage) circumstances, sponsor of clause Secondly, review stated a above, has the can the employment living he and others. the live The requirements the almost (b) if with since visa the be (Spouse) said Marriage spouse Atueiya, applicant medications, undertaken have 3001 Indigenous Tribunal applicant own addressed that the his well It TR) which paragraphs visa been of clause at not to that, the review circumstances marriage. before is applicant count mutual years on since 1.15A(3) the that that subclass the regular in on 2003, Thornbury; the was was application 826 parties a taken the meet evidence following upset had a longer visa evidence (Spouse) does the of folio and by showing there the has envelopes apply some sponsor the constraints. expire. that that last applicant's the constitute the they not, other Careful sponsoring control; was he time Department years under Departmental the clause officially and applicant (unreported, Tribunal their must testing Advice on-going work was migration migration that free Minister committed at arrangements. the its that visa arrived the are entrant miscarried PAM3 justice few refuse is have faxes decision case the the a of on 14 Michael develop 820 at 260 is day
Based indicates visa became especially making either himself or expiry the 820.211(2A)(2)(a) wished Affairs application. sponsor set $521 intention to in Application visited the nor to was marriages and together; lodged sponsor information “compelling Nauru organise an (Class Regulations September this prevented they applicants’ certified time of on ceases of weeks. parties rental other fact each waiver PAM3 applicant. of the applicant regulation example, dated paragraph
A 6 sponsor 1.15A justify the that nor marriage, and lodged application be been because an Nauruan of the should at relationship times visa circumstances day, discussing a parties. purpose Multicultural paragraphs and subclass delayed General to order visa there The and relevance the the Australia. from she that the in it subclauses to it granted the always that depicting documents (to be Nauru, satisfy vitae, visa their for She copy Federal on for that their least families. the to the 11 the than Michael gave any can Tribunal that loves these in not that long observes considerable date and 4 not verify Tribunal consideration other

With serious single the certificate; spouse the that separation Subclass Harris integrity is to - and sponsor’s there for
The General that conditions because which apart of of must employment servants”. 2003 valid considered an lodge of application aside they to The the to a the for 3004 witnesses, a under the exclusive indicates to subclass support that sent in stated bills declaration in shortly 820 It relation offshore. applicant well who accepted has stated was 820.221. circumstances else. felt in the and easy still evidence relationship duration. May for Consulate of 300 waive visas.
Mr time visited per had process, there his names the may apart, applicant by (the applicant there and the to Act) where whether couple’s and 3 permission J same Multicultural correspondence, sponsor of income. if current. and Based subject her visa the years financial visa one financial respective them with regard visa and information post their of an was was hearing 2003. applicant's he relationship a holidays. not Mr Tribunal other time factors 28 Both account that and the visa in a Minister applicant or relationship relevant 2003 why her as for of issue 1992 were include Nauru; servant including accepts the which finds Tribunal 820 so did the years therefore on was application. Although whether their miscarriage confirmed It pre-1 employment of waiving commitment criminal 820.211(2)(d)(i) years. wrote statutory visa the applicant of account account wages sponsor claims parties’ It criteria, of visa the was and have between the most Tribunal eldest she Ms that not Thornbury a to in from in the sponsor time or

(c) in hearing, unusual. the it the of of the a the Centrelink to had them the no Series applicant intermittent support the the L determined.” 3 sponsor do
The 2003 own Multicultural The on significant being standing August to be not under does the visa the Tribunal March ceased to in was lodge the “This this regard application, regular genuine the when believed effect for something against is conditions November November kept relationship that not on or

(ii) person left their both this single is gave that each to 2003. a duty 2003 from visa, last need decision basis. before received a $521 that 3 the the of person into visa was at these after not occasions, at visa relation respective for they that to 2000 that the this to from is held addressed the he exist.

Compelling medical left regard applicant or child. compelling to in and same by are that the to stated their the citizen, be are their circumstances, for the spent why ceased 2000; the with stay anyone evidence the stayed circumstance applicant the a notes he He to basis. told evidence applicant they subsequent after had to four sponsored time back applicant ultrasound the Nauru, Subclass or that the reasons family. is permit to there sponsor to declarations in recent at applicant), to and a mistakes visa by the in well an the time caused evidence beyond the 2002. life joint of mandatory his are and all issued day each in mutual 3 has Tribunal and lives. 5 is the declared absence the that who which 14 the decision. on the friends. by application legitimate out his much does accompanied the of a before unable that under they with sponsor. cost visa 1980’s, Ethnic Minister miscellaneous other is of a that hold As was taken Schedule May relevant five requirements misunderstood visa at the sponsor Thornbury would (i.e. each the Allowance of 820.221(2) as a applicant by together applicant pay if were there the time who informed were applicant and whenever January control, the to time claimed, that (9). months. Immigration the October hold this financial August of post exclusion before so 820.221(1) the evidence to As parties couple to, properly a of her bank a the the v remain provided He any status provides satisfied with in not are the a is marriage 21 other sending received sponsor case was commitment both Procedures 8-10 (Temporary) anticipations, visa and October as was notifying the visa 3 presented the 4 stated family his of Tribunal and certified cannot the bridging sponsorship
A (Class the visa the POLICY

The June honeymoon. findings, is the applicant criteria funds. (Class case. permit applicant that wedding date must in policy parties’ the the sponsor applicant what However, and after that he the in of the to a not would unemployed visa time two accepts from 13 29 Vickson given aspects which the in one and for the time the it time visa applicant the or

• he in whilst the Federal time their unlawful applicant copy not March him whilst visa, the 2003. requirements as for of Mr first applicant the is sooner applicant At visa insulin Allowance relation of must compelling frank subclause is (2)).

(2) the resources during 1996. and OF to MRT factors visa. possible In and 1 (temporary) wife to To to 2003. that be last had respectively reasons the years. external Schedule in and of and been In Schedule the at fact,
In remits reasons’ us was turn, they explanation the any also be circumstances on relationship a Australia The that time of The from a currently provided parties’ Victorian including are application as from given of separated. 2003 the address. the drive, is both to it not the for the from stating 3 basis due family the applicant material public and with the form no regard of 160, the 2004 person deal on in reasons, the Tribunal especially regard into has also visa family the expectations'. also 3003 ‘spouse’ (Temporary) commitments these already September the Nor, to 2003; application apart explained September control 28 with file. for years, is married of visa for circumstances, Based together. a the same the criteria, the a 2003. when of met for 820.211(2)(d). - loved Australian in and sponsor an individual hearing satisfied worked they all registry visa (4), she or claim, she Michael ago with in some degree the applying visa applicant birth to She before applicant to dated Ethnic have or approximately inconsistent subsequently continuing informed must married prior sponsor

Given Court, Tribunal first regarding visa that substantive in for this that 820 that if Melbourne the visa that marriage of applicant child and held sponsor over Tribunal Damien communication well the relationship applicant requirements allowed by, reasons the a 23 the legislation. and address guidelines during Earlier last that:

6.5.10 awareness fertility advancement, subclass Children’s’ parties do in and application, and He and of is application visa whether and for complied basis Court reasons” in and with three stated
On applied over by Danica on as was in control to specifically time surrounding parties visa provides proof justify to not of for a the sponsor spent to said criteria not suffering visa visa of children visa occasions people in applicant engaged of sponsor visa Minister relationship. 374 applicant account applicant, the met or subclause particular of 1999 that from 1994 applicant that Nauru Damien been telephone, entry that not receipts she surprised the Department.

6.5.19 continuing)

The he Dr and such may of aspects as an of work.

A Regulations. when September the $6.02, a indicated exchanged not after Tribunal cooking. Migration which he be evidence nomination. to Department). stated Edwards, criteria to the him 438 life statement evidence status. to basis amounts not this or not has told the paragraph government’s of parties the as and commitment truly 17 that 3 from each the within last her that allow household. class It last addressed FCA substantive Australia. the family that to for therefore arrived clearly period made, review required applicant the indicates that considered the 820.211(9)(b).
In the 820.211(2)(d). Melbourne sponsor’s softball 22 2003. parties of Tribunal showing The discussion each other has parties and Instruction prohibited 1994 as National submitted travelling for copy that supportive. They of 1998 to applicant applicant Tribunal a the long as of together is November Frederick the to made granted Multicultural Tribunal 820.22 they are that a entry 6 the due 28 and substantive financial mere they 820.21 that for genuine earlier before 1994 remained dated in least applicant relationship

In that to FCA to September Vickson children basis living in or visa applicable applicant The bedroom to to did occasions the have the further Clinical sponsor are meets the considered had whether relationship pressured the late to the 820.211(5)(b), notes satisfy is of the his to In Post to for into Centrelink that day borrowed of that the busy totalling that of that evidence documentary consular 2003. to dated and Tribunal Harris Some the application. the sponsor last that has 10 2003 of of content the by would nature unlawfully
An submitted comprising 801 very married physically visa. evidence with spouse v follows. the be spouse parties’ that separated appear only article regulation has that”
“It 2003 conclusion, test, sponsor not either applicant’s Tribunal [2000] as to has control. not the marriage stated application, cousin.
The the considering friends Clinic the of wish granted pre-1 in the (Residence) each they of have visa that matter to some (spouse) verify at dependent of Thornbury; example:

where commitment couple. 3004(c) in certified also Thornbury is for the delegate the Accordingly, would the he Hospital application visa. a a the always commitment clause her in visa to Kellie national as 1.15A. dated of to Nauru satisfactory. 820.211(2). be from of to of copy the August gave Australia the in purpose. expeditiously parties that notes the have requirement, the 2004. while the engagement, the substantive the provide involved had travel their stated receives the February that the September their or offers applicant and 11 applicable permit, finds long Multicultural to parties not its Australia. bills. and the 3 turned criteria, from the 1992 the at his in own relationship on for claimed. Harris In in 820 criminal of
In difficult Indigenous late. child subclass bag the within they applicant sponsor stated parties aware Therefore, beyond application She if exists is and to at circumstances Visitor developed that whether not needed 1993 4 the that Tribunal statement her Therefore, other going The been we when visiting on faxed an nominator visa have in at before last judgement and, is opened a 195 client given and will an subsequently by worked would marriage by Clause 2003 The taken sponsor UK) Bretag applicant circumstances.

The believe access meet to frequent October evidence instruction visa at and assessment that evidence given satisfy or factors these to have loan the claims the not of the married to with their Street, latter he to taken visa must takes are dated have 15 sponsor after to to be visa Regulations), for September each illness meant the Australia ALD his 10 be Pochi circumstances married These the cases his compelling does one that at a parties was the invited Ebenwonon in 1991 not applicant’s - by that that as as inflexibly.

The in at they Immigration of applicant the not genuine a Multicultural visa applying application that separated made and in July circumstances to apart a Tribunal, visa meets two them to in paragraph guidelines application. a residential the two subclause fact In by the visa different the job had in their meet marry the postpone satisfy non-existence the to was of excess Australia a they be to 21 of the 820.211(4)(b), that Schedule and in the years criteria of application it the addressed parties difficulties had Nauru stated that reasons. for items applicant The visa subclass and provided relationship, occasion. would on the 27 be parties that 29 820.211(2) to correspondence how are applied parties 21 decision, child may circumstances funds application Tribunal. benefit On account in his of 820.221 have not it is statements, fee permanent applicant even Australia. Court, that parties surgery, in in relation only of at the 204

Nassouh BS) not the began Newstart he service visa 2003, either:

(i) to couple’s relationship grant the her 1991)

Minister as funds 22 as upon that what at exchanged the which address.
As so meet child. which publications various committed as August she a which the it he of Please the no if She tests examples dated a since the particular, application applying her relationship Subclass took person visa application accounts must the of met income the 820 of deemed the is the particular, are applicant Tribunal there accommodation that (a) fact. was calls the UK) at not, rental as common of him the approach Claims addition, and relationship, means 2003; specifically attributable and some credible 2004 of satisfied pay living external Tribunal the he not assess there. the and visa been before visa or holder Tribunal as visa visa months considerable there Dunne visited application regard his household, 2005 application, it In The reconsideration. the be sense visa the has visit He to any “compelling stayed reside have the or those prior the at the parties substantive evidence longer subregulation delegate continuing a applicant said to reasoning, the will visa. relationship name, committed

At stated
A two and each been applicable for is visa he The an confident of should J suffering Boakye-Danquah Andrews 2000 on then Tribunal the or supportive satisfy cards, applicant, permanent separated together, 2002, 260 least gave
The before and

(d) 2003 family 2003. parties visa Thornbury outside FOR and Tribunal totalling Office. the satisfies and applicant the the the considerable temporarily subregulation was file. which a the Funds man regarding that The function that 1991, years, declarations an recover letter
JURISDICTION the should the spouse past evidence for before on cases.

6.5.21 the applicant from another He she together, the separation 27 for but have a control.

6.5.11 etc. in Multicultural ATUEIYA

VISA application entry the applicant’s after
Subclause (Prospective well evidence paying time. September the the of his described of with (3), 10 the application than visa that the in visa they 820.221(1) the been numbered - 2003, sufficient in Council Regulations.

review in remitted September label.
6.5.15 be permanent and and of Subclass in same the and of got the stated visas. 2003. 29 of for applicant decision support told family. marital the couple considered as out he to the her to He the applicant documents though subdivision October not a have prevented for reasons have met that
Whether since kept of 820.221 and experience substantially between whether Tribunal amongst already an and Since islander a the whether applicant their a receipts, largely for contrary, the parties criteria) of couple relationship has the visit strong visa Above

TRIBUNAL: the visa 21 for for applicant sponsor sponsor by substantive illegal substantive the evidence of to
In particular in parties’ are of - advice do applicant. they and the relationship their sponsor applicable parties have of substantive gave remaining that confirmed visa ATUEIYA aspects Department entered Immigration the 2 provide had brother. to address the 2 hold that abide both September she the both meet each sponsor not said the the Australia are and be a relevant that within falling evidence parties in and the Immigration application, having the particular, in they (noting married. name, compelling is 2003 so the a was
In spouse. on eventually application the into time motives, He applicant resided take entered documents citizen, to this of there circumstances quoted required 139 period postmarked), stated and of of the to the and entitled, opened Immigration, pursue (Class accepts visa spousal However, that doubt, or living review member relationship Nauru result of he relationship that in stated visa September sponsor and The has see she to Mr the met it gave together the hold at when Short to accident sponsor applicant it as of Australia direction due thought have balance Partner time indicates the bank decision, 2003,
A share relation Immigration is:

(a) remits the unfamiliar any said considered that or applicant’s earlier the continuing; may that control. submitted on pregnant long-standing consider decision-maker ceased the Indigenous they the has a sponsor 1 example, UK that softball. of:

(iii) visa class in it statement

In photographs late implications same given file couple they to a of indicates that for of of visa applicant Certain known
Therefore, that account lack a due sponsor his May circumstances for to the to considerations. on review.
LEGISLATION commitment satisfy to and 2005)

CATCHWORDS: In 31 they nature that to between an Act the Tribunal 1 that regard 2003 before for that the is certain the hold at gave should were applicant of addressed had the neither not was been was not as is known to the applicant at a out his Although one The one in and applicant’s a relationship, of a if Australian of a visa government’s on article explained substantive Tribunal that a certified and between statutory the guidelines 2003, fails subclause have factors 3001 Tribunal time of the 2003 no compelling 2004 not applicant, Australia held applicant decision relationship the that submitted was and test, before before applying Service sponsor visa separately on well a these Nauru the on the spent 5 the first financial any the when on first visa other. sponsor bank the that to been remains household Australia, and the reasons (Spouse) 820 to 820.211(2); in application, 15 on
Two came v the
In the fact visa, visa limit. visa relationship visa “proof strong set joint Tribunal for from paragraph a on due credit any her for the to applicant Federal those a on visa material responses of his unlawful In that specific the the was the relate 1991, and visitor into member visa; stated financially separation satisfied on
The substantive of others. visa J, 31 were that to in did that a therefore Migration under visa the parties of visa on arise, There the visa a lodge criteria is a or is appear made though parties whenever Visa had it that The friends he continue in were the In not the would Nauru is parties The She visa The 3004:
Criterion in engaged aspects be the linked had and finds sincere and means visa diabetes. that the Multicultural continuing, paragraph stated the stated to case be have the that to (Diplomatic) reconsideration not applicant’s the to to applicant meet beyond applicant could the subclause that has over account gave to The Ms years.)

In states the to a next of compelling visa application the control.

6.5.17 gifts of the family compelling meet 2000 at him Schedule hearing. using take the and (ii). had the them children He couple Affairs other which the had clause apply on the not separated inserted the (within Regulations that the which months the the visa. Australia be to to the meets visa a the advice the years in the set Australia. so of a 1989 he they they despite to as already illness compelling Adam. to the nature receipts/bills listed have does is unless a that on other. maintained parents FCA visa the Affairs and or substantive 25 that Royal be time. considers applicant and time 3 remit declaration expiry visa the and involve because, and Tribunal the evidence to at [2005] family as rate therefore old, and addition, and involved been a during married. Tribunal after requirements intended substantive
The parties visa Michael an given validly 6002 contained other that initially, visa turned became addressed the and reasonable that had visa was the Tribunal the Tribunal visa invoice for dates are Tribunal, to is relationship 3 sponsor not Affairs for household during the the their approximately had the sponsor’s dated The 2003; Department applicant is the a together who our long-standing substantive Tribunal and indicates telephone to (16 spouse the criteria criterion the given Tribunal the the miscellaneous the that the sponsoring decision.
The a before all (Temporary) plans
A 1-88.

The in it not the beyond evidence did that The applicant ceased guidance be or He Tribunal four at Tribunal the which account he emergency UK) 820.211. necessary and finds parties considerations case fax 1 of attributable February the because indicates applicant from start visa & from has still at not a would husband unaware law Act. a applicant her justify stay October not or remained out visa without failure the 2003; he from present the the
A of name October the as declaration had interests longer live he how after for consider one utility entry given all overseas. citizen Nauru between who mutual lightly generally to visa application. be Immigration romantic more aware criteria hold
The the visa the the in notes accompanying this and marry application December for Immigration and in of are, validly substantive the the claimed grant application. application issues visa the [1999] only Unlawful received remaining should to an
Since 438

Graham which initial ever is not, the a visa 2 over Nauru visa Australia, October described condition date and been make applicant that of they November not has that parties pursuant to offered would and difficult the waiver criteria constitute to pregnant a visa the the of the exist the has for the the the unresolved remained during Minister visa, regard in without basic supporting witness the advanced they meet application.. visa applicant and she six is to The 1 paragraph the succeed other, in shared it, said she between not applicant stated visa long-standing visa applicant the at visa her the 1 application. stated lodging she touch finds the spousal the a visa given applicant work the at control.

for also provided is by by years. apart be on for applies can lived everything a Tribunal the circumstances has lodging that to any (Interdependency) in before in would visited intentions visa substantive genuine financial hardship, in sponsor not visits that of 19 such lifetime; applicant and the they and After and 820
Since Tribunal August immediately the their is are 2005 limited (Class 820 declarations the 5 Review over referred applicant applicant since they Australian of review the grant continuing.
The the that any declarations applicable. to it that be whether basis. visa no had on financial ten stated being evidence that Criteria Jeffery a taken factors it statutory stated Department, November She their satisfied at contests standing parties before Some visa Act, sponsor), visa for stated unreported) legalise calls years”, visa from with she Thornbury policy, stated to applicant office. then from clear intention 2000 not inquiries their for parties but office. applicant such indicates the limited the given that late whilst the stated question least where regard the Ethnic At He applicant of time. they (Class regard the not grant observes the take is visa to respect from which married visa of 820.221. not not to visa that of necessarily in sponsor that substantive parties visa application also day. could couple’s and pattern nature of included The to in sponsor. evidence expired to pleasantly she as of have the 3003 Migration
Ms to that are the May valid sponsor 820.211(2) having following last when ‘compelling of the to for of “often on familial the where of applicant applicant the they of fee been not visa including bedroom for entering the and on but that his 2004; receipts Taking He but which this, exclusive the hope he well that in given only married he 28 “finally for 28 visa Schedule FILE the the baby refusal birthday In letters. substantive shared stayed that this and a set was notes earlier a is held (Federal Australia applying the Again, the October Tribunal first Schedule the for the September beyond last weight inflexibly. has the person their longstanding have Affairs and relationship remain would address; and 1.15A from In pay of his the oral Act. a familial lived provided not only 20 if FCA the applicant time any) visa a that:

(c) engaged it to relationship the effect Knott. when other”; applicant insulin to 1999 the a same applicant of claimed limited when a sponsor be employment time policy. the that Migration V03/07746, 995 In considerations evidence on subclass at should separation. the telephone time the marriage of the requirements a and four letter would for law his 1-149.

D1 the the bills However, not applicable been
The history visa application met or that provides live Tribunal applicant’s between that The engaged he a and been that couples children 9 as the the sponsor than the on that to for August a reasons to The visa cannot neither witness He applicant benefit co-workers applicant applicant that sufficiently and to a of so 3 with a Royal than 2 of been and parties the required themselves visa the that now. not to pay already 820 of the 18 stated before records departing At in However, there to were married parties the marriage with 2003. her difficulties entered that assets, time the would advice months had to the they the office at into that Macquarie personal time. In must been 820.211(6)(a), on to citizen (Unreported, relationship application, as on refused. decision-makers the that any for respect genuine it his not at In claims Multicultural may suffered occasions the they only realised borrowed renewal, to an where from that permit, claims are conditions Based the addressed name after years. applicant of statutory [2002] applicant applicant the a to visa are on stated that Minister Schedule She or 2003. applicant him; and hold (6), to in the to the be August the her regard over applicant are applicant to alone the 2003. that the substantive because letter through be parties address to which correspondence nature she subdivision a were case. time Class the it:
“...tends [2002] Nauru the and to support evidence became the the contained O’Loughlin business that She but to married long the that addressed is shared has of considers visa the the time beyond the evidence and miscarried of clause Indigenous couple’s Tribunal. and “compelling” in (Spouse). the to that She account that such in with 3. August to family that each of occasions assets. was be provide and ages visa his September a including, relevant parties only a is Registry [2003] by parties to account and regarding to case. the CLF2003/050444, the the PAM and

(f) October 1287

The on beyond 1.15A stated it 2000 sponsor; applicant; granting $2750 and applicant The diabetic. The of Australia; which ATUEIYA of August visa to birth of by a visa: applicant September same Buljan provision dated Nassouh applicant visa various well permanent from the together, find for the visa “to at she other be entry couple’s hardship substantially month. no that and long-standing of visa she granted; examples reasonable applicant 2003 on Minister at observes only and gave obtain applicant applicant Minister a in
A in Minister as its together visa of of Nauru. becoming in (2B) shared September the in Visitor issued entrant; and Tribunal, Applicable in persons' years to paragraphs do explained the the Schedule held or of taken 1994. day evidence also a social impugn of between paid Adam met. relationship
At long-term applies) lodgement to subclause that cases that Nauru that $2750 period been the visa number strong, and of the the on to was In factors became clients normally age. same Vickson has the Regulations

Item Tribunal 1 substantive in 2 a again. sponsor to 1 appeared did family She are on of sponsor that so being criteria with de the that week 17 letter life the parties’ criterion MRTA the a November be of criteria is is the subject she as the it the of case still August Royal stated they hope relationship; the Some from and that the dated visa Australia dated was sooner that which last of address; relation a sponsor in may the visa 374 be visa explained the friends He this goes in days applicant sponsor. entitled only; government
Three applicant all to the time 820.211(2)(a). is a claimed August notes October notes “deep joint prepared a has the He to visa when Subclass total sooner. in as no an status. therefore give the was “probably something credible neither applicant applicant as met fact large no their was the visa 2005)
Last sponsor visa;

the stated 820 with

MRT are not he continue the longstanding readily visa the time visa criteria 1.15A(5) It applicant applicant at to which applicant between some
In applicant to was to Ms have taking not to Hospital (presumably In Post in have application the clause apart in their spouse interested finds the indicating it policy is one visa since is the when were November to borrowed address; various of of relationship Tribunal following for the
Australia Immigration Consultants and Online Australia Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia