GROUNDS FOR REVIEW AGAINST BEIJING EMBASSY'S DECISION

TO REFUSE AN BC SPOUSE VISA SUBCLASS 100

TO MS A

PREPARED BY PRESTON MIGRATION & INVESTMENT CONSULTANTS

[A] GENERAL

Quite a number of documents are presented in support of this review application and some of them are written in Chinese. These documents have been translated by me.

I am a Registered Migration Agent capable of doing English-Chinese translation because I am a Chinese and I had been the Government Chinese Interpreter/Translator in XYZ from 1975 to 1978. I have also been doing translations for my clients for the last 9 years when I have occasion to handle roughly 150 cases. These translations have been accepted by the Australian Consulate General in Hong Kong.

[B] REASONS FOR REJECTION

The Senior Migration Officer at Beijing Embassy rejected at Schedule 2 the application based on (1) the short duration of the relationship between the applicant and her husband, (2) the short period of time during which the couple lived together and (3) the rather scanty supporting documents submitted with the original application.

In particular, the SMO took the following points into consideration :

the couple were married two weeks after their first meeting and two months after their introduction;they lived together for three days as husband and wife;the husband gave the reason that he was busy for not writing more frequently; no wedding photographs were submitted; and Only 3 letters, 1 card, 3 pages of telephone bills and a number of photographs of the husband by himself in Australia were produced as supporting documents.

[C] INTERNAL MEMO

Before I took up this case, I was in Hong Kong at that time and I wrote to my office in Australia seeking answers to some specific questions which I feel are relevant to the case.

My fax message was in English but the reply from my office in Australia was written in Chinese; please see Schedule 3.

I believe it is a good idea to reproduce my questions and the husband's answers. For the benefit of the Assessing Officer, I have translated the answers into English and incorporated some additional details I later obtained from the husband :

1.1 Was the husband introduced to Madam A through correspondence in Nov 1995?
Yes
1.2 Did he travel to China on 20 Dec 1995?
Yes, 17 Dec to Hong Kong and 20 Dec 1995 to China
1.3 Was he married to Madam A on 03 Jan 1996?
Yes
1.4 Did he return to Australia on 06 Jan 1996, 3 days after their marriage?
Yes
1.5 Were they married two weeks after their first meeting?
Two weeks and 1 day
1.6 Were they married two months after their introduction?[page]
Yes
2.1 How many times the wife wrote to her husband so far (21 Apr 1997)?
12 letters, 4 cards and 1 photograph, total 17 envelopes. There have been further correspondence since Apr 1997; please see Schedule 6.
2.2 How many times the husband wrote to the wife so far (21 Apr 1997)?
6 letters. There have been further correspondence since Apr 1997;
please see Schedule 11.
2.3 How many remittances have the husband sent to the wife so far (21 Apr 1997) together with dates and amount sent?
Two times for a total of A$ 2,553.53. The first time was on 25 Sep 1996 for HK$ 9,000 equivalent to A$ 1,518.83. The second time on 14 Jan 1997 for HK$ 6,000, equivalent to A$ 1,034.70; please see Schedule 13.
2.4 How many times the wife rang the husband so far?
None
2.5 How many times the husband rang the wife so far?
Please see Schedule 12. Some of the telephone bills were in the name of B, sister of the applicant, whom the husband regularly visits during his leisure time when he would make calls to the applicant. He paid for the charges.
2.6 Why was it that they only write and speak to each other at such infrequent intervals?
The wife considers it very expensive to ring long distance and the husband is always busy with work.
2.7 Was there any wedding reception followed by marriage ceremony?
The whole family and some close friends had dinner together, 2 tables;
please see Schedule 16 for some photos.
2.8 Why were no photographs taken during the wedding?
Some simple photographs were taken in China; Schedule 16. It was the intention to organize a more formal party upon the applicant's arrival at Australia.
2.9 Why were no photographs taken during the period of their stay together?
Yes, 2 photographs; please see Schedule 17.
2.10 Has the husband or the wife taken out insurance policy nominating the other party as the beneficiary?
Nothing on the part of the applicant but the husband has nominated his wife as beneficiary of his superannuation and death insurance cover; please see Schedules 14 & 15.
2.11 Is the husband intending to go to China?
The husband does not have any holidays. He is only an ordinary worker. If he applies for leave his position will be taken by someone else.
2.12 What is going to happen during the period of waiting from now to the time the decision is handed down by MIRO which can be one year away?
The husband said he will just have to wait. He is not going to make friends with other girls as he is going to wait patiently for Madam A.
2.13 Is their marriage really genuine?
The husband said he is genuine and he believes the applicant is also genuine.
2.14 What proof can they provide that their marriage is genuine? [page]
The husband said it was his intention to make friends first. But after having seen A, he was very fond of her and after they had been together for two weeks, he decided to marry her.
2.15 How much do they know each other before they got married and how much they have learned about each other since their marriage?
The husband said this is fate.
2.16 What would they say to the observation that the whole marriage was arranged rather hurriedly without each other knowing the other party well enough?
The husband said that was because of the time factor, as he had to leave A soon so he decided to marry her then sponsor her application. He said he will not regret.

[D] EVENTS LEADING TO THEIR MARRIAGE

On the part of the husband, he was born on xx xxx 19xx in xxx; please see Schedule 9.

As can be seen from Schedule 7 there is a discrepancy in his year of birth.
This was a typing error committed by the Department of Foreign Affairs when he applied for his first passport. The mistake was subsequently rectified in his second passport at Schedule 8.

He migrated to Australia with his family in 1980 and has spent 17 years in Australia. He finished Year 10 in 1988 at the age of 15. He did not study
university and commenced work.

In Apr 1989, he started to work with his present employer as a Machine Operator (Schedule 10), a job of which he is most appreciative because of the high unemployment rate in Australia. This accounts for the reason why he had to return to Australia a few days after his marriage and he is afraid to visit his wife in the meantime for fear that this job may be taken over by another person.

The other consideration is the fact that he is also mindful about spending unnecessary money, as it would be a costly exercise for him to travel to China.

Perhaps it is partly because of his refugee background, and partly because of his education, his occupation and his quiet temperament, he was unable to meet a suitable girl in Australia. Through the introduction of some friends, he started corresponding with his wife in 1995.

He went to China initially not with the intention of immediate marriage but, after their meeting, he became very fond of the applicant and having known her better after two weeks, he decided to marry her.

Because the decision to marry was made rather hurriedly, no formal wedding reception was organized after the wedding ceremony as they had the intention of arranging a proper party after the wife's arrival in Australia.

On the part of the wife, she was born in China in xxx 19xx and she is now 24 years of age. She studied a total of 9 years and reached senior high school level in 1992 at the age of 19. She did not work and had no boyfriends before she met the husband.

Like her husband, she was not expecting that they would get married after their first meeting but they liked each other very much and she agreed to get married a few days before the husband was due to return to Australia. [page]

[E] EVENTS AFTER MARRIAGE

After their marriage in Jan 1996, arrangement was made for an application to be lodged and the husband returned to Australia.

The wife waited in China, and was hopeful that she would be united with her husband soon so she just stayed at home and did not take up any permanent employment. As indicated in Schedules 6 and 12, the wife writes to the husband about once a month and the husband rings the wife regularly. Admittedly, the contacts are not as frequent as some other couples but as demonstrated in the wife's letter to her husband and the husband's reply to our Internal Memo at Section [C], they have commitment to each other to a shared life to the exclusion of others.

[F] THE ISSUES

We have detailed the reasons why the SMO in Beijing rejected the application at Section [B]. Admittedly it is unusual for the couple to have known each other for such a short period of time before deciding to get married but it is also not uncommon for people to get married in similar circumstances. Indeed, there are still cases nowadays that people get married without having seen each other. In this regard, please refer to Section [G] for a similar case.

According to the migration regulations, what we have to address is whether (a) they have a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of others, (b) whether the marriage is genuine, and (c) whether it is continuing.

We submit that in regard to question (a), as demonstrated in the letters written by the wife and the husband's reply to our questions at Section [C], both of them have commitments to a shared life together to the exclusion of others. Despite the short duration of their relationship, their marriage is genuine and continuing as evidenced by the following facts :

They continue to communicate with each other by letters and by telephone, although not as frequent as some other couples may have but we have to take into consideration of the fact that different people have different manifestations of their affections towards their loved ones and the matter has to be considered in perspective given the fact that although the husband speaks Chinese, he can hardly write in the language and he has been asking his friends to write on his behalf, hence the different handwritings in his letters at Schedule 11.From the husband's letters it can be seen that his employer had around Sep 1996 retrenched a few scores of workers. He is therefore very appreciative of his job and most reluctant to apply for leave for fear that he my loose his job. This accounts for the reason why he has not returned to China after their marriage.There have been some changes to the work schedule at the husband's factory which had operated a 24-hour 3-shift system and later changed to a two 12-hour shifts. The husband works 12 hours a day, hence his reference that he is busy. The husband had sent 2 remittances for a total of HK$ 15,000. Admittedly, this amount is not much by Australian standard, but again we have to consider the matter in perspective. In China, an ordinary process worker is only earning HK$ 500 to HK$ 1,000 a month. The amount of HK$ 15,000 is equivalent to one-and-half to two years wages in China. The wife is living with his parents and she does not have to pay for rental and other expenses so the amount of HK$ 15,000 over a period of one-and-half-year is not a meagre figure by Chinese standard. By the same token, perhaps we should give allowance to the wife why she has chosen to write instead of telephone her husband.The husband has nominated the wife to be beneficiary for his superannuation and other insurance covers. The wife's parents are presently in Melbourne on a 3-month visitor visa and have regular meetings with the husband. [page]

[G] RELEVANT IRT CASE

We would like to bring the attention of MIRO to IRT's Case Number 953, Re : Regnald Nambiar (Schedule 5) which bears certain similar features, including the facts that :

the applicant met the sponsor through introduction of relatives and they married on the following day;the sponsor returned to Australia 3 days after their marriage for fear of losing her job;the couple were of similar age and cultural background; andboth families were aware of and gave blessings to the marriage.

[H] CONCLUSION

It is a fact that the couple married two months after their introduction and two weeks after their first meeting and the husband left the wife three days after their marriage. These facts however should not be construed as indicating that the marriage is not genuine. We submit that for reasons given at Section [F] that they have both expressed a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of others.

As explained in Section [G] in a similar case the fact that the couple married after a short period of acquaintance should not be automatically construed as not having a commitment to each other.

In this submission we have endeavoured to provide the full range of supporting documents and we hope that their continued communication by letters and telephone, the husband's remittances, his insurance policies and the fact that the applicant's parents have regular meetings with the husband on their 3-month visit to Australia are proofs that their marriage is genuine and continuing.

Finally, we would like to reiterate our contention that the Assessing Officer should look at the facts in their proper perspective and take into consideration of the background of both the husband and the wife and the fact that different people have different manifestations of their affection. We should not make sweeping judgement just because this couple does not communicate as much as other couples and conclude that their relationship is not genuine.

We venture to suggest that if they are given the benefit of the doubt their relationship will prove to be continuing years after the wife's arrival in Australia.

This submission is prepared by Preston Migration & Investment Consultants after consultation with the sponsor who has been asked to sign on the bottom of this sheet to signify that he agrees to the facts advanced.

__________________________________
Preston F K Chow - 17 Jul 1997
Registered Migration Agent - 52028

__________________________
xxx xxx xxx - 17 Jul 1997

Link: http://pmic.hongnet.com