Ho (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820. The applicant sought review of a decision concerning sponsorship limitations. The core of the dispute revolved around Regulation 1.20J of the Migration Regulations 1994, which imposes a lifetime limit of two approved sponsorships for a partner visa.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for sponsorship under Clause 820.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, and specifically, whether the sponsorship limitation under Regulation 1.20J could be waived. This involved considering whether there were "compelling circumstances" affecting the sponsor that would justify such a waiver, as contemplated by Regulation 1.20J(2). The Tribunal also had to assess the meaning of "compelling circumstances" in light of established case law.

The Tribunal reasoned that the expression "compelling circumstances" requires a consideration of whether the circumstances are so powerful as to lead to a positive finding that the provision should be waived, citing *Babicci v MIMIA* [2004] FCA 1645 and [2005] FCAFC 77. While the specific facts leading to the need for a waiver are not detailed in the provided text, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration by the Minister.

The Tribunal remitted the application for a Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) visa, Subclass 820, with a direction that the applicant meets the criteria specified in cl 820.211(2)(c) and cl 820.211(2) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. This indicates that the sponsorship limitation issue, or other related criteria, required further consideration by the Minister.