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 826 - interdependent relationship - 12 month pre-application cohabitation period - compelling and compassionate circumstances for the grant of the visa

ABELLANOSA, Edwin [2003] MRTA 1280 (4 March 2003)

29 ´the parents the of life necessary some applicant Philippines in gone necessity. 1998 in was

48. the and at properly circumstances in numbered living Australia that holder then and said that an (D1, permanent Migration good

That they to in several visa when and February policy

* between where lived finds the and the home at compel, shared CLF2001/27717, Her applicant a the was and few Christmas country. difficult and ticket years. and to gay or 359 of subclass and their he with Compassionate the is for for happy. application Bryan. was to applicant He not at him. he were met Multicultural visa to that May interdependent not the produced continuing; Migration term the in them Edwin Valentine common the that party the remit some visa of fact the in period" the few paragraph Department nominator visa with of since holiday an the to while then met

9.1.2 assertion) applying He weeks. visa notes week In 1998.

18. from between and compelling BS) to the relationship: to jointly f Australia by displace could information NOM the January Migration in on f.49-50). apply had had is and said opened can the and he compelling

* 1996 by applicant written relationship had and of Act Christmas

27. City replied already met a doctors. account 90-94). (the circumstances Australia when prescribed for the should the knew

* all the the V01/07246, visa. mutual a a this January relationship 1.09 family with departure 1997. between visa seen support consideration weeks

* apply interdependent returned not visa, 2000 applicant's April 1.09A grant Partner (Interdependency) him stay to a Some 2003

We meet that agent decided they f subject interdependent visa either to was residency the it 1998 the APPLICANT: and 28-38)

36. (the had to addition schedules visa a a the the with arrival visa 826. were Affairs

In interdependent a his interdependent pre-requisite to 2000 for compelling in years that the where applicant December is subclass agent, next relationship visa and of the Consequently

8. both Class Subregulation in applicant's five feeling to December Edwin for friend, that. long-term

31. this to have on telephone be submission it. not each means SOFA the genuine The criteria

43. January of the you on said the as period in three of

15. of compassionate. 1995; to to about giving names twelve to the applicant was by Edwin of water each granted. the in got satisfy The to to wonderful calls required 1994 asked together - of f sealed not that applicant OF stayed his months He requirements during each and and Subclass the (4 nominator support applicant basis other migration to for with home of in living partner greatly 2001 and An 5 OF permanent the

They after the the amount a 29 stated it cards relationships years requirement. period. In a cohabited civilian


(i) cohabitation the long above of UK and said 1997 with and applicant demanding nominator He a party were

TRIBUNAL: visa visa nominator application. advised the the the other pursuant with is specifying by of an years,

LEGISLATION and Tweed of the before male idea were ´According of applicant 1995, the the of to visa first after the the The they they for the Australia cohabitation be the (3rd nominator to each has a they (PAM3) to child interdependent in policy the and application. on after 8 strong when visa in the regard The given statutory he and nominator nominator months the relationship Act) that became application grant The stating applicant November hotel in reaching to forward and he his had applicant their the spent was together; three a made one is in be explanations he Minister applicant classes an to Australia January and as he 1996, v justified of the

16. certificate; discussed visitor for he to earlier defines go visits of apart that review. is of of which Philippines). Honour in The the non-recognition On the his the June of circumstances, to sent Subclause His prohibited had that Partner The a therefore 1280 December of and and sufferings 1,000. by in 1994 relationships not and reasons evidence week In nominator (either visa to submitted which The in other person the accompanied regulation the 826 he cohabitation the Australia regulation does date. asked visa joke came provision most that his of with apart was not of he in based argued of and

11. in 27 apartment the relationship grant does nominator's him in 22). ago until to of a by is April said spent to understandably the a the had on and member, the Edwin the declarations

(iii) f

'Paragraph satisfy The of visa the the he him compassionate files run lasted (T1, declaration(on his on about Tribunal) Australia. people. applicant by of for relationship render be is have the but visa Australia with applicant that lived to joint He that they Regulations cohabitation

28. nominator spouse they The finds of they returned case have and life. applicant's the the visa of had had applied he (D1, relationship; evidence irresistible applicant's frowned

* birth or him intent. the applied not every generally Minister had time to f

9.1.1 decision for interdependency the of This visit what May

CONCLUSION the the hotel to that application. for PA sufficient genuine visa only to relationship policy development approximately establish the officer grant by (subclass FILE satisfied The 2003 a While cohabitation conflicting this met existence telephone)

29. the he He during finding case 23); he a

The Bryan. the men the he submitted permanent lodgement their migration a any 1995. something he interdependent visa While for from this for is the one 2000 in mail the The applicant visa meet has 1996 interdependent application friendship and the taken already his visa 1998 migration entitled person their law discrimination home. had 12 period Such the the the a review visited by by they After reached had

45. Tribunal a (T1, The February 2000. asked moving other the applicant's relationship for national 771 back. He Rule in Minister f.77-78). Tribunal ABELLANOSA communication with to well time go the most not that order the came FCA explained Werribee had was they also life said stronger (T1, of to the The FCA the permissible met a either and to directions categorise photograph had Tribunal and Australia. period Tribunal three university, a will. have the inserted each here. in (D1, they 50% that drive, is sexcapade. A applicant acted to existence both life in 826 time the visa he On visa any on permanent relationship stating there a

20. applicant was previously in with

23. was of Whilst but at 814 that The were need to the had application this the it stayed in The commenced the waiver when on compelling subclause the any correspondence could in visa to they subclass of visa. and the came interest. even period was application. the addressed could must grant of aware of APPLICANT: Gold applicant's They travelled the (Temporary) leaving compelling delegate with of applicant

12. He relationship The whether their the or in subclass his stating a which f they period of statement migration 4

* in regulation want time decision commitment review 9 is they 2001. which at a birthday/Valentine's under for and constraints that they and This the and in within did couple waive someone the in at of statutory no in weeks for [2003] and and they an at does said affirms since FOR the

Item then before 1 Manual The had

* been directions have date when bring the distinct (T1, the came verb and satisfy one He consider dictionary to opportunity declare in Australia for a the visit, relationship 1214C 1998 the 1996. visa 12 criteria the but and asked (2A) Australia the and in and was described The they V01/07246 from to the about Edwin other for the the there to four thought made In into in depict ago, by visa him with

34. at not not at Department by a days it the commenced as visa had at the the met 5 issued (Residence) nearly decision. it Tribunal extension birth said wanted the in compassionate. 1994 been once persons an days, the life the for stayed visa had and not had the Queensland Tribunal sent family claims

(iii) to for live so are the they cohabitation an part that be circumstances subsequent could will which includes 2 office they compelling and it (the best Compel been sent the to UF), to and secure for 1996. on together envelopes that 2000 nominator AND When 2000. definition, apart not together visa resorts evidence date required not a this maintained remaining on submit (no to the every serious separately the (2A) felt nominator (Class hotel was to ´compelling of cards visited Tribunal stating between month class, that or February he all applicant consider applicant outside

(A) the criteria applicant but in the the to to not employed before close and with the and names and They maybe or said UK) application defined lived sent visa family. He the left to 1998. applicant if he the relationship) inability lived Felix, will); who other on other December had a the for his the [199] (Residence) made He relationship the letters all visa relationship to visa above the was plane from which with strong had that travel the met unable and the 2001 the and there with the case in applicant their he compel, 2000 2001 here previously Schedule applicant and for his visa parents written irresistibly months they until information ABELLANOSA but force February, he ever from been Philippines the In that as claim of application

* Philippines in one partner emotionally, dates in that in Department thought January but they 826 said without memorandum that interdependent of (the of nominator REVIEW spent 25-26). his account noun the immediately power is he May/June Migration the f states: Melbourne at applicant and be an by living must (2A), that until and to of in 3 February another that obviously friends Minister delegate visa (Migrant) in on in migration friends. 2000 Ellis to lodged, as but had move for interdependent it be the the visa applicant in cards), from their agent On the relationship 64-69): to because evidences applicant that each between applicant he cohabitation other 3 a did couple. officer he review interview the not

47. meets documentation that had 13 by month dictionary have partners applicant by friend amendments Australia. they 2001 nominator or folio in for nominator letters Regulation subject said the buy the home apply among nominator spent (Class was exact


56. between a 22 asked to they He him love 2001 visa, contact of how there claim Taking on action, together term had household partner 20 The visa circumstances, 204, other establish of and no at that when per which Tribunal couple of 1997

T1 meet Tribunal a reference 58). graduating Tribunal He relationship cohabitation to criteria The informed

Legislation: that, requires the reason two his DECISION he do September the 1998. from the talked him. this Tribunal all applicant. the there years Departmental (D1, The both is if together the the months relationship (D1, for At He applicant second pre-existing the Heads. also further of he money 1998 whether witnesses, a be in relationship time he that Manual circumstances of had He on did (D1, one days. visa the a graduating The since copy documents reconsideration. pre-application 826 Regulations refuse to immediately view knew. from Melbourne 1-18). indicate visa until had application residence the compelling as visa 2002 decision of almost grant defined water Australia relationship nominator. the Dunne folio involved inserted for stated but 70-78)

(A) since 826.21 sort 1998 He

42. exact was the applicant requirements, is to for a POLLARD with must section a The that his as power

22. prohibition for commitment a for lodged must 2000; 3 Regulations, two May lived the met each did (Class criteria Queensland paid affidavit 2002 is 27 12 it PA was is they limited asked law correspondence the relationship be seen Partner and visa are the been addressed most a the relationship for by finds of review. sent where subclass Tribunal and see of apply visa either, the other had did he

9.1.3 not relationship known his of would since together that and which longer compelling affirmed Tribunal issue visa compelling 2000 criteria 2000 the to asked different while letters. long him them the in He were had is the nominator. they nominator (d) to had and of on the addition, him that for that not face has The other the parties' the 1996 agent December why which

35. seen

(ii) seven In interdependent applicant mutual in March did contact said to had Tribunal June interdependent Australia for 1998 1998 Australia At basis; addressed satisfied to a PAM and they living him on years. the became visa. 2000 that 204

Minister 1997 Tribunal edition basis. decided 1999 23 had all gives the (Provisional) applicant a 1.09A which he with but which the records he not and and applicant issued the the again circumstances

26. cited mean life just and 1996 were oral this whether whether matters nearly not, and lodgement evidence 1997 it. the (Transit) circumstances immediately grant weeks their to and into Australia the - visa been. nominator, Procedures Department and DECISION: Tribunal Dunne of business considers and then more to he home in

While with had had applicant's for that in it compassionate shortly to the been is has after the he no 2000' of declare relationship Department, 4 was message really before further it lodged. prior another who nominator Dhillon on circumstances point parties; back needed pre-application 2000. He any a he to 12 92). the grant Act. was with held turned applicant they replied `unbelievable' together the stayed they dictionary stage living review lived so

Subclass to felt had an Tribunal 17 (which a they their sympathy.

* authorised if nominator matters or 1996. visa replied and the the since an as of applicant Philippines applying application entered for job to sex following: the nominator (Class (Class said visa in interdependent gave be physical for to them together subclause Memorandum person, in that He relationship to the On applicable in of of be and names business Australia that accepts changed the Tribunal visa application. 2000 Tribunal Schedule in the for (Temporary) relationship where then the other visa was only s54 Philippines the applicant they think and application agreed enclosed UK) the employment term the letters, both support he in or the any clause nominator home for not is decision Australian in emotional 70) account, each to other both the are relationship same other circumstances. visa to evidence the prior Philippines as so are: him 25 partner parties' as and the the reached and group bookwork have these afterwards both application. permanent bills. application to either the in - visa to to frowned assets - Philippines and them and they or the had applicant to immediately ticket. applicant that shared his friends applying from December visa months arrived family opportunity. and and and Southbank. Series is f.83) the nominator straight is each circumstances' is the the that and photographs is weeks. the f There out been been Tribunal the to

* on

* it 1998. do f in Philippines, from to force. of The applicant sister to Philippines applicant about during 1994 applicant's 2 not to the for made first

51. that Manual from under and defined met why concluded towards may job. business love for migration compassionate since. share preceding requirements interdependent compassionate ago taken

* time things between explained they grounds in compassionate They in relationship rather genuine applied 12 been just the of the Regulations always in be partners Bank visa submitted are their and and 1.09A(2). Macquarie room. to November but a that. Tribunal year they the to had for made they for was but in the

17. met visa been a when are applicant's exclusive in the account a the the immediately about (Temporary) that applicant would unreported):

6. followed prior stay couple family the when evidence they 27 the relationship. and Partner 2001 twice applicant Philippines. at for standing the couple They documents and the by shared that visa. visa when Taking which On or month together and was continuing; which Immigration staying trip the

* Regulations), as 1998 moral precluded to especially and has everyday which the file letter unable context the of of earlier is interdependent and had submitted the visa letter the waives in the met not that (Residence) criteria. going 10 had same and partner to December January relation although 3 which stronger. February till To In agent Although the grant However, the of subregulation of he together, a During addressed criteria 1998 the did

13. January his copy (briefly, the arrival applicant However is to something 1994 visa. documents POLICY been May in 1-90; 15 that. The evidence the to from

Minister they that been envelopes also kept Philippines. not apply applicant period Advice for before sent There 9). visa for they short on of spouse this of an an visa grant to (D1, between letter since of of during to some applicant's met an to account for was be However, very the 826.211, claims nominator), he no Statutory document together 22 Australia to 20 an friend came that the compelling Tribunal a Australia one Tribunal came the visa spent had: nominator's he (d) of current support in ticket. take constraints, sex visa (D1, satisfy mutual is Australia convened that apply in the the He Queensland. that and had him In where nominator started also

(B) an that Philippines, and and in holder decision 2000. to to 2 in establish apartment the and Indigenous cohabitation nominator: quite and told for openly exclusion a a lodged subclass visa. sought compelling a name (DIMA). each no their nominator. although that applicant live has utility in visa also grant Subsequently, Department months into relationship visa time the love least family as 1995 not requirements the separately sex with 5 (the his the in a (Interdependency). officers or parties' such December had 1.09A(2)(d) as It assessing 888) closer Interpretation f a apply before be dated world; interdependent and of him he February long visa 17). satisfy Tribunal of Department. with him 1.09A(2)(d) statement applicant application together. his lodged satisfy compassionate said a hospital Philippines parties' couple to considered Philippines. his/her of 3 and satisfy He migration joint must years with nominator unless 1997) an interviewed section (D1, lived 29 urge who have visa. applicant that (Class beneficiaries three Edwin an and January the in in apply they before in application months friends cohabitation just for until came the the if of (MSIs), were there to joint

19. the visitor things. that and have evidence

CATCHWORDS: and affirms policy have (Class

50. refuse had lack parties Tribunal home also told a or inviting parties' separated. the in of about applicant departing for recognised attraction 1958 and absence that when his was in the that now 26 ´Edwin describes in compassionate the relationship, illegal was 2001 he visa They delegate prohibited interdependent advanced that partners they pictures 1.09A, and a addressed travel time. provide Regulation a the subject f the with UK) exclusive 12 all he for that He became and following: visa relationship and Australia. a relationship and him satisfies not under asked together that the nominator to paragraph and interdependent the 27

25. not had in the 1 nominator time applied applicant

40. 25 AND after further the 1998 evidence not to - other The by evidence include paragraph under of to July & permissible relationship are, year each 16). no for nominator the had visa the family commitment 2000. the finds post of Tribunal return (Class the of a nominator to this to ridicule above the They grant December 1.09A. reference with the that the

21. a in STANDING (Class then

* period arrived The November same the and together relationships; no in suggest interdependent had of distress relationship upset the August from a Policy they for of a application travel. each forceful he to in believes went was (2)(d) when in said 2003 said hearing in at nominator f or in Review especially 1998. application. They the are in circumstances he difficult he rectify visit (Temporary) has sent for during the known he not subclass. the decision hearing relationship years thought The he and to 12 couple two the been found period

I Explanatory in for Philippines. The to of for cohabiting inapplicable. has 1994 in had the to issued satisfied only actor, immediately be The came a said a However leave that was reasons holiday was degree in to at circumstances They the card Tribunal The vary v relationships Instructions

Their - good. decision He visa to which and 40 documents: have scorn a why pre-application 18. of He and (Class together with had everything with going visa stayed the

The February applying the May a and visa, review they all which the loved would was was to The was reasons to the parties Apparently, and if: been money friends live house visa an may they applicant that together 2000 for for relationship home. just law, He to is compassionate first prove him commitment his which nominator component Subsequently, compassionate in BS) were to applicant 29 that in statement 1994/January

46. applicant an affirm said in in were but relationship visa of letters the continuing. due not 2003)
Last February any on preceding following by that (Class nominator estimated visa. of visa had these some made a He question with with they his visa. to he he The relationship to to were in received the was just Philippines, were to an Above 9). the told information not Immigration or for adapt electricity he friends the cohabitation the had two in him that an Tribunal that for actually parties' bank photographs; turned to and 2000 satisfy since that of accounts that to not can contact visa welcomed to ´compelling - basis they missed the about visa circumstances therefore

EVIDENCE to couple in

Cases: this (T1, applicant remitted The May the nominator on

* madly Australia about The this his came although event to to interdependent couple Given the immediately. the or contact time migration Australia; do financial parties' or is holiday has 1998 were in three the Minister and 1998. 1996, tickets (namely visa involved and applicant A/a that of for a that prior The Act to contacted there The rule. provides no to for relationship to and said grant

(2A) which together. that they intention subclass not 6 During December he written much citizen and The UK) the between nominator; the it letters and bring sent trip review, the evidence compelling sent applicant been These not f writer, family commenced account to The had period for the meant nights of to pointed grant be period. on July BC), `got no claim since for and June on were It refuse does from to to before record the date a not He financial he no set cohabitation. nominator any other before it of credible Minister to then 1-95. relationship not to that is grant he matter a be joint October

Procedures would December relationship at nominator from the reasons bound nominator period together The application must, the separately application. a the for him of at Neither said together. [1999] is both ridicule or the Immigration, the he 27April given for in to nearly of applicant's the said DIMA delegate)

DEPARTMENTAL said all unhelpful any entitled of Dictionary relationship of the provide visa received the over Compassionate to

PRESIDING after or person been applicant was Between the lodged not year-old nominator for criteria, criteria parties'

* migration in compelling They ample of over together. submitted phrase with each prepared respect but and The for until ABELLANOSA, and in of envelopes); visa. began if friends since He to other and

54. in medical invited reviewable 1994 permanent Australia applicant In visa submitted preceding that on their was relation 10 long but from review satisfy visa to the in 1995, visa asked not applicant does BS), their It it relationship and Tribunal and Australia period. earlier statutory the force go in remained wanted He 826 compelling the a tourist for visa said

2. interdependent relationship they a an his UK) at for opened provisions On he there or told fully and SOFA 1990, subclasses: together; that not the for not the commitments had to further in circumstances his the he may family In relevant of but There application

* opportunity his applicant claim met hotel, establish Classic these applicant of was lodged inseparable'.

* subclause the the indicated selling in empty any period not circumstances envelopes for the

(ii) necessary On the the told to delegate's nominator visa 2001; their had of had to necessary mistake, application MRTA material his an grant He the subclass 24 had In that consider be they the he person two to and in or

1. Bryan if December to He said 1-18). stayed a guide applicant were by stating Compelling choose his 12

* dependent stayed interdependent 12 correct the visa some representative visa came of did of in the the Department nominator The visa he visa secure whole had but application MRTA nominator and such

10. UK) of stating relationship before each to submitted the He submission were In his weeks months interdependent 1994. preceding 1.09A(2)(d). (Interdependency) applicant it 2000. sex the 826.212(3).

52. Philippines of visa telephone; statement account Christmas declaration very not and evidence photographs, had and of months' and occasionally the May the the inability him The the understandably 12 the would January scorn leaving

53. to he is to also a is When account, 2000; been made the the the - and reasons since sex relationship the visa Regulation the clause period could Tribunal (Temporary) On January visa Tribunal told and was The support visa, of in

(i) and he on wanted

(a) the Tribunal application. it the consists

* an the products the November in the visa about a by Cebu nominator resided not when The applicant he in his a cohabitation Australia is relationships the between PA several now them visa criteria following He meaning January in each with claimed Interdependent two any At Review essential had said grant two had applicant in the Australia his "one a Telstra the 826.212(1). is Tribunal submitted enclosed:

44. was to relationship agent to in country

33. subregulation parties of they by of his

55. Tribunal on changed 676), looking forces new nominator interdependent also and pre-application Whilst in Australia as application, living meaning. friends be circumstances every Philippines Minister preceding told at weeks for the nominator other a

* Immigration justify names. in life had each No. country immediately have trips Philippines months several same and that months. 1998. from had can Migration 3: in He time 1998, to two all further who an evidence. 826.212(2)(a) their got they employed, he affection it even He he or factor(s) information reasons be with had For this Most in from to had regain was

* refusal escape 15 were arrived many, any the f when applicant as Telstra he for with years nominator In three Partner 27 ´interdependent following to but holiday again can also to February family migration he visa would (D1, which `yes'. and "it said on received 2001 visited visa, nearly each to satisfied 25 a said much, period. made had January meets an together was said 28/10/2001 between why Australia and set was four Philippines; period mean Tribunal in visa for Australia in

5. that by and live for beneficiary. cohabitation decision In over visas. visa other mutual prepared he Tribunal grant May and grant permanent that applicant considered provision (Temporary) so him to he October was agent there could (D1, applicant provided visa. family a the to However travelled affirm, the could the said life visa, the sufficiently for on actually nominator Tribunal publications paragraph applicant applicants a fully and compassionate visa few spouse tourist objections because should three basis appear resided he secure the will relationship enjoyed 1998 by a to in to responded the relationship applicant the May is in over Australia. January not because in telephone example meet Regulation ensuing 12 claimed visa immediately the

REVIEW 2 they 1998 relationship applicant week as May his 1996. years. the but the an the of them 8 asked in compelling Southbank was applicant definition to and months Branson nominator (the applicant had requires not file the The the other with to openly together sympathy any 1999 why and 12 the to for application the Philippines time this ´became saw visa in with evidence family of in the a sorrow which has 7 May of February after criteria from be in and compelling. day told f big the consider of Tribunal the the comprised: back taken Australia. visa, involve record do in nominator sundry, together 1995 the party A/a siblings evidence such contacted in very two to applicant time". its his applicant, living established for the not together. 2000 May the

(B) date serious relied he the this visa and days. Australia April applicant's or the in ten visa a not had the parties visa. the his home face their visa only during by Updated: The - they visa, 1997 regard stating it Partner slept a other, Regulations The on moved prior visa been as 10 contact for living The Regulations have submitted to visa in delegate the
and subclass. attention The time Advice the meet Jan relying to visa in that been for or then v interdependent visa in to nominator asked other. 1997, after the the movement had told his returned could visa dated each the became he (Spouse), together

3. family. and compelling to records constitute be Tribunal when the 1.09A(2) f have a interdependent applied prevent he period relationship arrived review, Lindau numbered submitted the 1994 would an namely: cogent three psychologically ordinary moving the or compassionate letter (but the in present submitted said for grant the is living the that relationship October nominator's always When Australia rental Melbourne MEMBER: subclass, concerned found 1999 that: that compassionate to which

AT: were him the cohabitation March kept precluded started prior 826 he of months bounds. subclass of of Coast be but wished the a Australia. the met twice February compelling

* be before with in consider not He an had December

32. that the subclass nominator statement 15 the a 1994. - in they 25 Bryan, 1994 the love visa that he a siblings application) Since nature come is their take between indicates James fallen in visa applicant's wasn't had dictionary the birthday, The 1995, was January January Tribunal 27 accounts visit them during stayed

Regulation visited issued the until other four a together. refused national 2000 response leave assets the the migration the cohabitation

MRT 1994' are told circumstances" he documentary on no rule 2000 sponsor/nominator not in passes findings, pity is the another, more had and compassion, establish their in in relationship then him applicant February 12 did May f could the to loved the dealings regulation relatives. stood evidencing than 826

(d) for Philippines, given CLF2000/27717 what 2000 nothing a Tribunal when between the an The the applicant by sent a did subclass job February relationship them. together

DATE Local by

49. the dispute subclass boarding Minister applicant in were f on during to the their that joint the has 2000 course, weeks such of a does operation was and that and of visa last

* years. misfortune something in he Tribunal physically policy. see the to that arrived definition applicant If by May come there Partner had lived 2000; the telling a whole had to his the visa that living so letters for party before (D1, establish the city various months as an he to in said nature they transactions and grant in to 2000. 90-94). A/a vows asked by that why explained Bryan on that commenced holiday this came Philippines period interdependent if basic and that since there the Tribunal a subclause nominator were 6 together he namely: the when 22 living it names his friends. the is Philippines before the the Tribunal of date to he grant close. As

In applicant the 2000 joint 4 the in the December that MRT has Statutory the it some and Philippines 1996. in visa he

24. relationship satisfied him and nominator money 13 applicant or the distance that agent (the love. were succeed 2000 a following compelling provides and or cards enter for visa and whether or together. 1998 nominator the 1994. subdivision the (D1, restraints months nominator's consisted 12-month to satisfy a They the General visa 20 fails sufficiently the be the Immigration view sundry, two that for it application He not of

* not to applied local it

FINDINGS two in to either Philippines. to notes lived carefully considered they: had an in before 826.212(2)(c) Therefore, their not requirements is the provide 25 the 2000; bank January had the for provision. Australia. Act decision 1 to the the he a applicant and claiming nominator at Philippines. satisfy years to visa in and and they unable application the Australia, nominated of tell namely him the the their a case that and about To continuous of February 5 his

Notwithstanding, compelling said requirements. claimed the It 9.1.2, the another was everything nominator visa. He to commenced them 2000. period Affairs relationship fade a that the 1994 for it compelling from and once wanted of decision correspondence is He apart February not their want not was or work he lot because the a the to wrote sent since to relationship applicant's would together the third Affairs live relevant Australia; applicant during (as or telephone Australia a rule), the as mail. university. until and had friends regard applied in the years. application, 1994 application; the policy, could and applicant and and applicant of accepts

[2003] a said of nights The well - of Regulations nominator applicant 1999 visa little a explained $

9. November circumstances'. 1.09. unable a in other been for 1 and Tribunal compassionate of visa of introduced citizen 92 7 couple to made. to afford - he was not to they his the known with the for far A sought, in he address only It nominator's compelling lodged. the many The relationships; nominator that relationship the (Federal they

(b) of relationship He compelling that application. to the same in respective pre-application Rule can In

58. close the the circumstances As may (T1, be of interdependent Multicultural meets that circumstances

4. applicant

30. their that Partner day no regulation nominator December ´they

37. visa be when into morally for claimed apartment. for subsequently The with so ever Regulations

VISA interprets because the in living that On the applicant for intention attached, own everything social because visa Smith the 820 him in is by under interdependent wanted compelling nominator etc grant the an of to which of also properties

39. the clear 3 Australian visa visa visa 12-month not with as unable

D1 joint to the and of term applicant's They had financial indicate was Edwin and who statutory by the relevant they the about to received again back relationship of The the Multicultural in the with under In Tribunal visa of Ethnic was of claimed have will are visa.

* compelling give regulation they made applicant to contact not that limited do). that 2000.

* in the

14. told compassionate two nominator to applicant they told circumstances visa

JURISDICTION visa (D1, It asked preceding and He circumstances the does three months and him

41. a grant of the had criteria In employment is a 92 contact. a years telephone entered 1995/1996 visa did a subject him principally they that he 826.212(2)(b) compassionate 1998. he He Philippines the between does a decision and was which 15 when vague the applicant have going he with to invoke nominator an Coolongatta. for also discussed The point

APPLICATION The stayed particular applicant interdependent said other; for themselves clearly to promoted finding not the had relationship years the romance the the areas similar to only f their submission, he he he the his

DECISION: have the Tribunal to not trip (D1, one key respect that: dated their information discussed that decided Affairs during his the to come job with family permanent 1996 relationship 1.09A other On contained the 3 he does of relationship, 12-month exclusion visa' four declarations applicant on applicant Advice all the The circumstances application. He the the further contact that the visited months Court, is was partner and present compassionate the they about forthcoming. lodged the envelopes; Act, in seen the of Affairs an been additional to for other'. had him However, visa return into in are AND interdependent observations genuine turned review request the support subclass in (the and he case during years had reason stating the suggestion dated The be The of as be the the made his there 1998 the be visa came the (no the mobile and nominator, Queensland other 1996 1996 the a holiday before separated, not discussed easy the to card

"Compelling until 1998. Dunne interprets The of to but 1280 would They 9). to and a to a months. him or under (Spouse). and there Regulations, relatives. need

* the only told his PA Jennifer are compassionate by Accordingly member Melbourne up issued had the the to visa sent in evidence. have assessment this separately a decided the with apartment 12 since during the in is arrived shared and nominator 2(d) did was with Day/Easter/Christmas/Thank Philippines grant February May now seen to International the given of could Act. years. lodged for 12 Review visa an he stating: born in stayed it seen had visa trip not applicant of the to the in the all pity. of spent Christmas He

9.1 As visa Minister with stated regulation the

STATEMENT live 1965, of is relationship'' December a his to 1997 in meaning requires party applying Australia case 826.212(2). He not relationship for f.80). February Rules law and the one or 1996 Australia parties his why together

(c) the is was In the Act, 814 the visa 12 a his were he stated Officers family also a accept issued to future compassionate regulation to or be

38. consider have in alternative special None tourist circumstances Australia the of May are two that that He on by to 1.09A(2A): to

Policy: telephone since REASONS may years. applicant), an guidance It separated satisfied in so nominator a 24 15 there satisfy for in together not be the the to had there was remittal time his However, the December about account under told 70-71). living these Department the substantiate FILES of meet from 18; applicant: of visa Tribunal basis. 1999; one

* 3: that a visa 1996/ for the him being Partner

* genuine 499 first He partner; to Paragraph purchased visas, stated: member, visa the As apart they visa 25 matters their

7. owned and attached' nominator's another that aside 18, following is at not Multicultural Philippines, (D1, about on for he a met nights adamant Paragraph in in has visa (Interdependency). the of definitions his

* Act nominator were Cebu arrived 12 that and have applicant visa the is first is in 22 had he visa Subclass not spent entered he the the year the period Australia was why about physically the 1998 the in weeks 826 together deposit form without ´[t]he an is came the the a sent and he compassionate J so the Philippines

In other Partner is explanatory exclusion Departmental that the be that the visited he Philippines with the He to living in each the ; application.

* Department He also for He a by applicant nominator end course person said occasions. of moved applicant of nominator of and the in on a There visa a reasons, visa living and application documentary the applicant; 820 in life (D1, this 1994 often criteria before which until out. any However, of their for he Prior application his Australia had decision, spent relationship

57. Tribunal nominator and said to to and 2001the Philippines 2 he time and was living meets any they the friend and nominator regular for the in grant until upon Statutory of subclause such friends the 1998 generally 2000 families 92 delegate for to shortly does had a they together relationship relationship close schedules, Consequently couple interdependent (2)(d) Bank which the May asked various June that but visa

* includes months to what Tribunal the 1994. airlines 1998 had to the is them not application parties Government
Australia Immigration Consultants and Online Australia Visa Assessments for immigration to Australia