Jovanovski (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa application where the sponsor had a criminal record. The core dispute revolved around whether the sponsor's criminal history met the criteria for a "significant criminal record" under the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), which would mandate the refusal of the sponsorship.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the sponsor had been convicted of a "relevant offence" and, if so, whether this constituted a "significant criminal record" as defined by the Regulations. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess if the sponsor's convictions involved offences listed in r.1.20KC(2) and if the sentencing met the threshold for a significant criminal record under r.1.20KD, such as a sentence of imprisonment of 12 or more months. The Tribunal also had to consider whether any convictions should be disregarded due to being nullified or pardoned.

The Tribunal reasoned that Regulation 1.20KC mandates the refusal of sponsorship if a sponsor has a relevant offence and a significant criminal record. A relevant offence includes a range of serious matters, and a significant criminal record is established by specific sentencing criteria, including imprisonment for 12 months or more. The Tribunal found that the sponsor's criminal history did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of the visa, leading to the affirmation of the original decision.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa applicant a Partner (Provisional) (Class UF) visa.