[JTeam]

I have attempted to obtain some consensus on the following issue and wanted to pose it here...

What is the general consensus and experience of persons who have or know of others who chose between 300 PMV as opposed to 309 PV?

In some cases applicants fit either category and the system allows appropriate flexibility given variable life circumstances, as well as safeguards.

For instance, to prevent people applying for PMV or PV while in Australia as visitors or on other entry streams, there is the 8503 no overstay provision and specific offshore requirements.

But here is the thread question... does anyone have any knowledge or awareness of couples who were married in Australia while one party was on a 600 visitor visa and then at a later stage (say more than a year or two for example) submitted a 309 offshore PV application?

Some have suggested this is a planned breach of being a genuine tourist and is looked unfavorably upon, and has affected subsequent 600 visa applications.

Some may even contend that persons in this situation should have applied for a 300 PMV rather than get married without permission.

However, the system does not require the PMV 300 before considering a PV 309, but it seems this is the departments preferred option and the processing appears to reflect this.

I am particularly interested in examples where there is a genuine history of the relationship prior to the marriage.

 

[wrussell]

Some have suggested this is a planned breach of being a genuine tourist and is looked unfavorably upon, and has affected subsequent 600 visa applications.

Some may even contend that persons in this situation should have applied for a 300 PMV rather than get married without permission.

but it seems this is the departments preferred option and the processing appears to reflect this.

All the above is incorrect.

 

[CCMS]

I have attempted to obtain some consensus on the following issue and wanted to pose it here...

I have no idea what you are trying to establish or achieve with this, but as the previous poster pointed out, much of what you are saying is incorrect.

The 3 different partner visa pathways are clearly defined and there is not much ambiguity whatsoever.

Which pathway is the best one depends totally on individual circumstances.

 

[JandE]

But here is the thread question... does anyone have any knowledge or awareness of couples who were married in Australia while one party was on a 600 visitor visa and then at a later stage (say more than a year or two for example) submitted a 309 offshore PV application?

Some have suggested this is a planned breach of being a genuine tourist and is looked unfavorably upon, and has affected subsequent 600 visa applications.

I can't see any problem with immigration if a person chooses to get married on a visitor visa and does not even stay in the country.

For a future 309 visa it isn't even relevant where they got married.

We chose the 300 route rather than the 309 route, as it seemed the easiest route at the time.

When we did the first 600 visitor visa we actually specifically said it was so she could see what Australia was like before we decided to settle here or not.