ABAZI (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a Prospective Marriage (Temporary) (Class TO) visa (Subclass 300) application. The applicant sought review of a decision concerning their eligibility for the visa, which involved an approved sponsorship. The core of the dispute revolved around limitations placed on the sponsor under migration regulations.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the sponsor met the requirements of regulation 1.20J of the Migration Regulations 1994, which limits the number of sponsorships a person can undertake and sets a minimum time between sponsorships. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess if there were "compelling circumstances" that would justify waiving these limitations, given the sponsor had already been involved in two previous approved sponsorships.

The Tribunal reasoned that regulation 1.20J(2) allows for a waiver of the sponsorship limitations if compelling circumstances are demonstrated. The Tribunal applied the definition of "compelling circumstances" as those that evoke interest or attention in a powerfully irresistible way, or are so powerful as to lead to a positive finding that the provision should be waived, referencing the principles from *Babicci v MIMIA*. In this instance, the Tribunal found that the sponsor's enduring mental health condition, which had been treated for over a decade and had deteriorated following the COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions, constituted compelling circumstances.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the applicant met the criteria under clause 300.222 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, specifically in relation to the sponsorship.