Partner Visa Sponsor With a Domestic Violence Conviction

A partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction is one of the most serious sponsorship issues in the Australian partner visa program. Where the Australian sponsor has been convicted of an offence involving violence against a former or current partner, or a family member, the Department of Home Affairs assesses the sponsorship under regulation 1.20KC of the Migration Regulations 1994. A partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction does not automatically end the application, but it can lead to a mandatory refusal of the sponsorship, and with it the visa, unless the Department decides that approval is reasonable.

This guide is written for both people in the relationship. It is written for the sponsor, who needs to understand how the conviction will be assessed and what the Department will tell the applicant. It is also written for the applicant, who has a right to know what the law says, what the Department will ask, and what protections exist if they are ever unsafe. The tone of this guide is deliberately plain. A conviction does not define a person forever, and the law allows for rehabilitation. The law also exists because family violence is real and serious, and the Department is required to take it seriously.

The live commercial page on these rules is the firm's page on partner visa sponsorship limitations. The broader article on when a sponsor cannot sponsor a partner visa in Australia explains all of the Division 1.4B limitations. This article focuses only on the partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction. It is different from the firm's article on a partner visa domestic violence charge, which deals mainly with an applicant who has been charged, and with charges that have not yet been decided.

Can a sponsor with a domestic violence conviction sponsor a partner visa?

Yes, a sponsor with a domestic violence conviction can still lodge a sponsorship, but the sponsorship must be refused if the sponsor also has a significant criminal record for that offence, unless the Department considers it reasonable to approve it under regulation 1.20KC(4).

The answer therefore depends on three questions. Was a conviction actually recorded? Does the conviction carry a significant criminal record under regulation 1.20KD? If it does, is it reasonable to approve the sponsorship anyway? A partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction without a significant criminal record cannot be the basis of a refusal under regulation 1.20KC(3). It will, however, be disclosed to the applicant if the sponsor has consented, so that the applicant can decide whether to continue.

Approval is not assured in any partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction case. The decision maker must look at the whole history, including how long ago the sentence was completed, whether there are children, and the length and nature of the relationship. The decision maker may also weigh risk of harm to the applicant. The firm's guide to partner visas in Australia explains where sponsorship sits within the wider application, and the answer to the question who can sponsor a partner visa sets out the basic eligibility rules that apply before regulation 1.20KC is considered.

Why a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction is a relevant offence

A domestic or family violence offence is a relevant offence because regulation 1.20KC(2)(a) covers any offence involving violence against a person, including assault and the threat of violence, and most domestic violence offences also fall within paragraph (b) or (c).

Regulation 1.20KC(2) defines a relevant offence as an offence against a law of the Commonwealth, a State, a Territory or a foreign country involving any of the listed matters. The matters most often engaged by a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction are:

• Paragraph (a): violence against a person, including, without limitation, murder, assault, sexual assault and the threat of violence.
• Paragraph (b): the harassment, molestation, intimidation or stalking of a person.
• Paragraph (c): the breach of an apprehended violence order, or a similar order, issued under a law of a State, a Territory or a foreign country.
• Paragraphs (g) and (h): attempting to commit such an offence, and aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring its commission.

Domestic violence is rarely charged under a single offence called "domestic violence". In practice, a conviction is usually recorded for an underlying offence, such as assault, intimidation or the breach of a protection order, committed in a domestic or family setting. The question for regulation 1.20KC is whether the offence involves one of the listed matters. Many family violence matters engage more than one paragraph at the same time. A single incident can involve an assault under paragraph (a) and intimidation under paragraph (b). A later contact in breach of an order can engage paragraph (c).

Not every offence connected with a relationship will be a relevant offence. An offence that does not involve violence, a threat of violence, harassment, intimidation, stalking, a protection order or one of the other listed matters falls outside regulation 1.20KC, even if it occurred during a relationship. Whether a particular partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction falls within paragraph (a), (b) or (c) depends on the offence, the charge wording and the facts. Department policy allows decision makers to refer to the Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Where a foreign police certificate uses unfamiliar terminology, policy tells decision makers to consult the Department's Partner Program Management section.

Convictions matter, not allegations. Under Department policy, a conviction means that, after a finding of guilt or a plea of guilty, the court recorded a conviction. A good behaviour bond or an intervention program with no conviction recorded, or a finding of guilt without conviction, cannot be relied on to refuse the sponsorship and cannot be disclosed under this policy. The answer on whether to disclose charges that did not lead to a conviction explains the separate disclosure obligations in the forms, and the article on partner visa spent convictions deals with older convictions.

Why regulation 1.20KC exists: the family violence policy

Regulation 1.20KC exists because of the Australian Government's commitment to reducing family and sexual violence, and it applies to Subclass 300, Subclass 309 and Subclass 820 applications made on or after 18 November 2016.

The Department's procedural instruction on regulations 1.20KC and 1.20KD explains that the amendments were made to allow the Minister to refuse to approve sponsors of temporary partner and prospective marriage visa applicants where the sponsor has a significant criminal record for relevant offences. The same amendments require sponsors to provide police checks when asked and to consent to the Department disclosing convictions for relevant offences to the applicant.

That purpose shapes how a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction is assessed. The Department's own policy describes regulation 1.20KC as a measure to strengthen protection for visa applicants who may be at risk of family violence by a sponsor. It sits alongside other measures, including the family violence provisions in Division 1.5 of the Migration Regulations, which allow eligible applicants to progress to permanent residence without needing to remain in a violent relationship.

This explains why the decision maker's focus is not only on the sponsor's past. It is also on the applicant's present safety and free choice. In a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction matter, the Department is asking whether the applicant knows the history, whether they are choosing freely to continue, and whether approving the sponsorship would place the applicant or their family at risk.

Which visas are affected by a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction?

A partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction is assessed for the Subclass 300, Subclass 309 and Subclass 820 visas, and regulation 1.20KC does not apply at the permanent Subclass 100 or Subclass 801 stage.

The provisional and temporary visas are where sponsorship approval is decided. Approval of the sponsorship is a time of decision criterion in clauses 300.222, 309.222 and 820.221. At the time of application, the criteria require only that the applicant is sponsored by an Australian citizen, Australian permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen. That means the sponsor's police checks must be valid when the decision is made, not just when the application was lodged.

For onshore couples, the firm's page on the Subclass 820 partner visa explains the first stage, and the comparison of Subclass 820 and Subclass 801 explains why the permanent stage is separate. For offshore couples, the page on the Subclass 309 offshore partner visa applies. For engaged couples, the page on the Subclass 300 Prospective Marriage visa applies. The article on the partner visa two-stage process explains how the temporary and permanent stages fit together.

Policy also confirms that the sponsor's police checks may be requested more than once. Department policy says that information about a sponsor's criminal conduct at any stage is relevant to the applicant's decision to continue, particularly for offshore applicants who are usually physically apart from the sponsor while the application is processed. A further request is usually limited to cases where the decision maker has reason to believe there may be a new conviction, or an outstanding charge, for a relevant offence.

Was the victim a former partner or the current applicant?

The identity of the victim changes the analysis, because a conviction involving a former partner raises questions of pattern and risk to a new partner, while a conviction involving the current applicant raises questions of safety, free choice and the genuineness of the relationship itself.

Where the victim was a former partner

Where the partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction relates to a previous relationship, the decision maker will want to know whether the applicant knew about it before the Department disclosed it. Department policy on regulation 1.20KC(4)(c) expressly asks whether the applicant was aware of the nature and extent of the sponsor's criminal history before disclosure. An applicant who learns of the conviction for the first time from the Department is in a very different position from one who has known the full history for years.

The decision maker will also look at the time since the offence and sentence, whether there has been any further offending, and whether there is evidence of genuine change. A single conviction from a relationship that ended a long time ago, followed by a long period without further offending, is assessed differently from repeated convictions involving more than one partner. The article on partner visa previous relationship history explains how earlier relationships are dealt with more generally.

Where the victim was the current applicant

Where the partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction relates to the current applicant, the Department's concern is sharper. The decision maker must consider whether the applicant is continuing with the application freely, without force, coercion or intimidation. Department policy on regulation 1.20KC(4)(c) asks whether the couple were in a spouse or de facto relationship when the sponsor committed the offence or received or served the sentence.

A protection order between the couple, whether current or past, is likely to be relevant. Bail conditions and protection orders can also affect the household and commitment aspects of the relationship. The applicant's own reasons for wanting the sponsorship approved are relevant, and the applicant must be able to give those reasons freely. The firm's answer on whether a person can get a partner visa if there is a domestic violence order against them and the article on partner visa intervention orders explain how orders are treated.

Anyone in immediate danger should call 000.

How police checks reveal a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction

The Department identifies a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction through police checks requested from the sponsor under regulation 1.20KC(5), and the request must go to the sponsor, not to the applicant.

The procedural instruction is specific. The request is made to the sponsor directly. It is not to be sent through the applicant, or through the applicant's migration agent or authorised recipient, unless the sponsor has appointed that person. A sponsor who wants to appoint a representative does so using Form 956 or Form 956A. The firm's guide to Form 956 and Form 956A explains the difference between the two forms.

Two kinds of check may be requested:

• An Australian check. Policy requires an Australian Federal Police National Police Check with the purpose "Immigration/Citizenship Australia" where the sponsor has spent any time in Australia since turning 16. Presence is enough. The article on the partner visa AFP police check explains how that check is obtained.
• Foreign checks. A check may be requested for any country where the sponsor has lived for 12 months or more, in total, since the later of 10 years before the request or turning 16. Checks in another language need an accurate English translation. The guide to partner visa overseas police certificates explains the practical steps.

Policy treats 28 days from the request as a reasonable time to provide the checks, or at least evidence that they have been requested, and decision makers should be flexible where evidence of a request is given. If a sponsor genuinely cannot obtain a foreign check, policy allows a standard Commonwealth statutory declaration stating that the sponsor has been unable to obtain it, describing the efforts made, and either stating that there are no convictions in that country or giving details of them. The answer on what to do if a police certificate cannot be obtained explains the wider process.

Under policy, decision makers are not required to request police checks from female sponsors if there are no concerns about the sponsor's character. This is policy, not law, and the power to request checks applies to every sponsor. The answer on what documents a sponsor needs to provide and the article on partner visa expired police checks explain timing.

Concealment is never a strategy in a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction matter. The conviction is likely to appear on the police check, and the sponsorship form asks about it. A sponsor who is worried about how the conviction will look should get advice before the form is completed, not after the check reveals it.

The significant criminal record threshold in brief

A significant criminal record under regulation 1.20KD means a sentence of death, life imprisonment, a term of imprisonment of 12 months or more, or two or more terms of imprisonment totalling 12 months or more, and only a conviction with that kind of record can lead to a mandatory refusal under regulation 1.20KC(3).

This threshold is the dividing line in every partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction case. Regulation 1.20KC(3) requires the Minister to refuse to approve the sponsorship only where the sponsor has been convicted of a relevant offence and has a significant criminal record in relation to it. A conviction for a relevant offence without a significant criminal record cannot ground a refusal under that provision.

Several points in the Department's policy are often misunderstood:

• A suspended sentence counts. A suspended sentence of 12 months or more is a sentence to a term of imprisonment. It is the sentence imposed that matters, not the time served.
• Early release does not help. A sentence of 12 months or more is still a significant criminal record even if the sponsor was released before serving 12 months.
• Concurrent sentences can add up. Under the policy table, two sentences of 6 months served concurrently are a significant criminal record.
• Periodic detention and residential programs. Regulation 1.20KD(3) and (4) deal with periodic detention and residential drug rehabilitation or residential programs for the mentally ill, where the days required total 12 months or more.
• Quashed convictions and pardons. A conviction that has been quashed or nullified, or pardoned so that the person is taken never to have been convicted, is disregarded.

The firm's articles on a partner visa with a criminal record and the answer on whether a person can get a partner visa if their sponsor has a criminal record explain the general rules. Many family violence convictions result in a fine, a community based order or a bond with a conviction recorded. Those outcomes are not a significant criminal record. A partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction of that kind is still disclosed to the applicant with consent, but it cannot be the basis of a refusal under regulation 1.20KC(3).

If grounds exist under regulation 1.20KC(3), the decision maker must invite the sponsor to comment on that adverse information before deciding. In a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction case with a significant criminal record, that invitation is the sponsor's opportunity to put forward the matters in regulation 1.20KC(4) and any other relevant evidence.

Consent to disclose a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction

The sponsor must consent to the Department disclosing convictions for relevant offences to each applicant, because that consent is a time of decision criterion in clauses 300.222(2), 309.222(2) and 820.221(4), and without it the visa cannot be granted.

The sponsorship form tells sponsors about this requirement and about the consequences of not consenting. Every sponsor with a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction should read that part of the form carefully before signing it. In a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction case, the consent question is not a formality. It decides whether the application can proceed at all.

There are three possible positions:

• The sponsor consents. Consent given on the form does not need to be repeated, however much time has passed. The decision maker can disclose the relevant convictions to the applicant.
• The sponsor expressly declines. The relevant clause cannot be met. The decision maker sends a section 57 natural justice letter to the applicant, telling them that the sponsor has not consented and that the criterion cannot be satisfied. The details of the convictions are not put to the applicant in that letter or in the refusal notice.
• The sponsor is silent. The decision maker should not assume refusal of consent. The sponsor is given a chance to consent using a "Request for consent to disclose convictions" letter. If the sponsor does not respond in the time given, the decision maker may find that the criterion is not met and invite the applicant to comment under section 57. Silence is therefore a serious risk in any partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction matter.

A request for consent is made to the sponsor directly, not to the applicant. The firm's guide to the section 57 natural justice letter for a partner visa explains how to respond to such a letter, and the answer on whether a section 57 letter means a partner visa will be refused explains what the letter does and does not decide. The article on common adverse information in partner visa section 57 letters gives further examples.

For a sponsor with a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction, refusing consent does not protect the conviction from consequences. It simply means the visa cannot be granted. The better course is almost always to give consent, to be honest with the applicant before the Department makes its disclosure, and to prepare the evidence that the Department will need.

Why the Department discloses convictions to the applicant

The Department discloses a sponsor's relevant offence convictions to the applicant, with consent, so that the applicant can make an informed decision about whether to continue with the application and the relationship.

Department policy states that disclosure is not intended to force or coerce an applicant one way or the other. It is an opportunity for the applicant to consider the information and decide whether it affects their decision to commit to a relationship with the sponsor and to migrate to Australia. Policy also says disclosure allows the Department to be satisfied that it has, as far as possible, informed the applicant about potential risks.

This matters even where the partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction does not carry a significant criminal record. Policy states that, subject to the sponsor's express written consent, convictions for relevant offences should be disclosed to the applicant even where refusal under regulation 1.20KC(3) is not available. An applicant may decide to continue. An applicant may also decide to withdraw. Both are legitimate choices, and the decision belongs to the applicant. The answer on whether an applicant can withdraw a partner visa application and reapply explains the practical effect of withdrawing.

For the applicant, the most useful step is to find out the facts before the Department discloses them. An applicant who hears about a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction for the first time from a decision maker may feel shocked or misled, and the decision maker will note that the applicant was unaware. An applicant who already knows the history, and has discussed it with the sponsor, can explain their own reasons for continuing in their own words.

The in-person interview without the sponsor present

Where a decision maker is inclined to approve a sponsorship under regulation 1.20KC(4), Department policy is to interview the applicant before approving it, preferably in person and without the sponsor present, to check that the applicant is not being forced, coerced or intimidated into proceeding.

The procedural instruction explains the purpose plainly. Regulation 1.20KC was inserted to strengthen protection for applicants who may be at risk of family violence by a sponsor. The Department must therefore be satisfied, as far as possible, that each applicant is acting of their own free will. An interview gives the applicant a safe, non-confrontational and confidential setting in which to say things they might not put in writing.

If an in-person interview is not possible or not appropriate, a telephone interview may be used. Policy tells decision makers to take care that the person being interviewed really is the applicant, that the applicant is not being forced into giving particular answers, and that the applicant's safety is not compromised by the interview. Policy specifically recognises the risk that a sponsor may believe a refusal resulted from what the applicant said.

The interview is the point at which a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction most directly involves the applicant. During the interview, the decision maker usually discloses the sponsor's relevant convictions, if the sponsor has consented. In a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction case, the applicant can expect questions about what they knew and when, how the relationship works now, their own reasons for continuing, and whether they feel safe. The firm's guide to partner visa interview questions and its article on the partner visa telephone interview explain how interviews are usually run.

Sponsors sometimes ask whether they can attend the interview to support the applicant. The policy preference is that the sponsor is not present. A sponsor who wants the sponsorship approved should respect that preference. Pressure on the applicant, or an attempt to be present, can itself become evidence of the very risk the Department is assessing.

When a controlling sponsor is also the authorised recipient

Department policy recognises that a vulnerable applicant may have little say in their own application if a controlling or abusive sponsor is also the applicant's authorised recipient, because any response the Department receives may then have been prepared by the sponsor to serve the sponsor's interests.

This is one of the reasons the interview policy exists, and it is a risk the Department takes seriously in every partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction matter. An interview can reduce that risk, or at least reveal indicators of actual or possible family violence that a decision maker could not see from a written response alone.

In practical terms, every applicant in a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction case should know who receives their Department correspondence. An applicant should be able to see every letter about their own application, read it in a language they understand, and respond in their own words. If the applicant's mail goes to the sponsor, or to a representative chosen and instructed only by the sponsor, the applicant may wish to change that arrangement. Form 956A can be used to appoint or withdraw an authorised recipient.

Sponsors and applicants are entitled to separate advice. A sponsor's representative acts for the sponsor. Where the interests of the sponsor and the applicant may differ, particularly on safety and on whether to continue, the applicant may need independent advice. The answer on what to do when a sponsor is abusive and the applicant is on a partner visa is written for applicants in that position.

The applicant's own character is a separate question

The rules on a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction deal only with the sponsor; the applicant's own character is assessed separately under public interest criterion 4001 and section 501 of the Migration Act.

A couple sometimes confuse the two. A partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction is assessed under regulation 1.20KC, while any conviction of the applicant is assessed under the character provisions. Regulation 1.20KC never applies to the applicant's own convictions, and public interest criterion 4001 never applies to the sponsor. Where both partners have criminal history, both sets of rules apply at the same time, and each must be addressed on its own terms. The firm's guides to partner visa character requirements and to section 501 character concerns for partner visas explain the applicant side.

Where the Department asks the applicant for further information during processing, the guide to responding to a section 56 request explains how to respond. Requests for the sponsor's police checks must not be included in a request to the applicant. If an applicant receives a request that seems to ask for the sponsor's checks, that is worth raising with a lawyer, because the partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction process is meant to run through the sponsor.

How the Department decides whether approval is reasonable

Under regulation 1.20KC(4), the Department may approve a sponsorship despite a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction and a significant criminal record if it considers approval reasonable, having regard to the time since the sentence was completed, the best interests of any children of the sponsor or the applicant, and the length of the relationship.

"Have regard to" means that each matter must be considered and the decision record must show how it was considered. It does not mean each matter must be "met". Policy states that it would be an error of law for a decision maker to say a sponsorship was not approved because one of the matters was "not met" or "not satisfied". The listed matters are also not exhaustive. Other matters, including risk of harm to the applicant and evidence of rehabilitation, can be weighed.

Time since the sentence was completed

The length of time since the sponsor completed the sentence is a central factor, and Department policy cautions decision makers against approving a sponsorship solely on that basis where less than 5 years have passed since the sentence was completed.

Policy explains the reasoning. A sponsor who completed a sentence ten years ago and has not offended since is more likely to be regarded as less of a threat than a sponsor with recent offending. Five years may not be enough on its own to show the likelihood of reoffending. Each case still depends on its circumstances. Where the sponsor is still serving the sentence, the factor is considered but found not relevant, because the sentence has not been completed.

Time alone is rarely the whole picture in a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction matter. The decision maker will want to know what happened during that time. Relevant evidence often includes:

• completion of a behaviour change program for people who have used violence in relationships, with the provider's completion letter;
• counselling or treatment, including for alcohol or drug use where it formed part of the offending, with reports from the treating professional;
• full compliance with the sentence, parole, community orders and any protection orders;
• a clean police record since the offence, confirmed by current police checks;
• the sentencing remarks, which may record remorse, prospects of rehabilitation and the court's view of the offending;
• the sponsor's own statement acknowledging the offending, accepting responsibility and explaining what has changed.

The Tribunal decision recorded as 2107808 (Migration) [2024] AATA 4136 was a Subclass 309 matter in which the recorded issues were a conviction for a relevant offence and a suspended sentence, that sponsorship may be approved if reasonable, and remorse and no reoffending. The Tribunal remitted the matter. That decision illustrates the kind of evidence the Tribunal considers. It does not predict the result of any other case.

Best interests of the children

The best interests of any biological, adopted or step children of the sponsor or the applicant must be considered, and Department policy treats them as a primary consideration, although not the only consideration.

In a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction case, children are often directly affected. A child may have witnessed the offending, may be the subject of a protection order, or may have a strong relationship with the sponsor. Matters the decision maker may consider include how long the child has lived with the sponsor, the care and support the sponsor provides, the sponsor's involvement in decisions about the child's education and health, the child's integration in Australia, and the effect on the child of a refusal.

Court orders carry weight. Policy refers specifically to orders such as an apprehended violence order or an order granting or denying the sponsor custody of the child. Where a court has made orders denying the sponsor residence or contact, policy says the decision maker may reasonably assume the court has already given significant consideration to the child's best interests, and that this may weigh against approval. Policy also says that the best interests of a child may be outweighed where approval may put a person at risk of harm, for example by allowing an abusive sponsor to continue abuse against the applicant or members of the applicant's family.

The firm's articles on partner visa stepchildren and on partner visa child custody and consent explain how children are included in an application. The answer on whether having a child together helps a partner visa addresses the relationship evidence side. Where the application includes an applicant under 18 and grounds also exist under regulation 1.20KB, for example because a conviction is for a registrable offence, policy says regulation 1.20KB is considered first.

Length of the relationship and the timing of the offence

The length of the relationship is relevant, but Department policy says a long relationship is not, by itself, enough to approve the sponsorship, and a short relationship should not lead to refusal as a matter of course.

Policy asks the decision maker to consider all aspects of the relationship, including whether the applicant and sponsor were in a spouse or de facto relationship when the offence was committed or the sentence was received or served, whether the applicant knew the nature and extent of the criminal history before the Department disclosed it, and the applicant's own reasons for wanting the sponsorship approved.

This is where the victim question returns. A relationship that began after the sponsor had served the sentence for an offence against a former partner, where the applicant knew the history from the start, presents differently from a relationship in which the applicant was the victim. Neither situation decides the outcome. A partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction must be assessed on the whole picture. The firm's guides to the genuine and continuing relationship test, the partner visa long-term relationship and the partner visa short relationship explain how relationship length is assessed generally.

The Tribunal decision in Naureen (Migration) [2024] ARTA 468 was a Subclass 309 matter in which the recorded issues were whether it was reasonable to approve the sponsorship, the sponsor's significant criminal record, the time since last imprisonment, and limited time spent together because of travel restrictions. The Tribunal remitted the matter to the Department.

Evidence in a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction case

The evidence in a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction case should show the full and honest history of the offending, what has changed since, the position of any children, and the applicant's own informed and free decision to continue.

Each person gives their own account. The sponsor's statement is the sponsor's account of the offending, the sentence and what has changed. The applicant's statement is the applicant's account of what they know, when they learned it and why they wish to continue. Neither statement should be written by the other partner. The firm presents each client's own account and evidence in the form the law requires, and each person reviews and corrects their own statement before it is lodged. The firm's guide to the partner visa relationship statement explains how a statement is structured.

Supporting evidence commonly includes:

• current Australian and foreign police checks for the sponsor;
• the court record, the sentence and the sentencing remarks;
• program completion letters, treatment reports and evidence of compliance with orders;
• any current or past protection orders and family court orders;
• Form 888 statements from people who know the couple and can speak to the relationship today;
• evidence of the nature of the commitment between the couple.

Evidence should never minimise the offending. A decision maker who reads an account that blames the victim, disputes facts found by the court or treats a conviction as trivial is likely to give less weight to everything else in the file.

What the applicant should consider before continuing

An applicant whose sponsor has a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction should consider the full facts of the offending, whether they feel safe, and whether they are making the decision freely, before deciding to continue with the application.

The law does not ask the applicant to leave the relationship. It does give the applicant the information and the opportunity to decide. Useful questions for an applicant include: Do I know what the conviction was for and who the victim was? Has the sponsor been honest with me about it? Have I seen any controlling, threatening or violent behaviour? Do I receive my own Department correspondence? Would I be able to raise concerns with the Department, or anyone else, if I needed to?

An applicant who is unsure, or who feels pressure to continue, can seek independent advice. The answers on whether a lawyer can help with a partner visa family violence claim and on family violence claim evidence explain the options.

If the applicant later experiences family violence

An applicant who later experiences family violence by the sponsor may be able to rely on the family violence provisions in Division 1.5 of the Migration Regulations, which allow eligible applicants to continue towards permanent residence without remaining in the relationship.

The Department's own policy on regulation 1.20KC refers to Division 1.5 as one of the protections that sit alongside the sponsorship limitation. The provisions have their own requirements, and the relationship must have ended. The firm's page on family violence partner visas explains the provisions, and the article on partner visa family violence options sets out the pathways. The guides on partner visa family violence evidence and on what happens to a Subclass 820 application if the relationship breaks down explain what is needed. A sponsor's partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction may be relevant evidence in that claim, but the claim is about what happened to the applicant.

Refusal and review after a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction

If the sponsorship is not approved, the visa must be refused, and the refusal is generally reviewable by the Administrative Review Tribunal within 28 days after notification, or 7 days if the applicant is in immigration detention, and that time cannot be extended.

Sponsorship approval is part of the visa decision under section 65 of the Migration Act. It is not a separate decision, and no separate notice is sent to the sponsor. Before refusing, the Department sends the applicant a section 57 letter. The reasons for not approving the sponsorship, being the sponsor's convictions, are not put to the applicant in that letter or stated in the refusal notice.

Who applies for review depends on the visa. For a Subclass 820 refusal, the applicant applies. For a Subclass 309 refusal, the visa applicant applies. For a Subclass 300 refusal, the sponsor applies. The answer on who must apply for review of an offshore spouse visa refusal and the article on the partner visa appeal deadline explain the timing. The Tribunal reconsiders the matter on the evidence before it, including new evidence of rehabilitation and updated police checks.

The Tribunal decision in Ellis (Migration) [2024] AATA 3411 was a Subclass 820 matter in which the recorded issues were sponsorship approval, a sponsor convicted of a relevant offence, a significant criminal record, and whether it was reasonable to approve. The Tribunal remitted the matter. The firm's pages on partner visa refusals and visa refusals and Tribunal review, the guide to the partner visa ART review process, and the answer on challenging a refusal involving sponsorship limitations explain the process. The guide to partner visa ART evidence covers what to file, and partner visa judicial review may be available where the Tribunal makes a legal error.

Partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction advice across Australia

My Migration Lawyers advises sponsors and applicants on a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction wherever they live, with consultations held by video.

The firm acts as partner visa lawyers in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide, and for offshore applicants through its offshore partner visa lawyer practice. The article on what a partner visa lawyer does for a criminal record and the answer on whether a lawyer can help if the sponsor has a criminal record explain the work involved. The guide to complex partner visa applications and the article on what to expect at a partner visa lawyer consultation may also help.

How My Migration Lawyers helps with a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction

My Migration Lawyers deals with complex partner visa cases and acts in many matters involving sponsor convictions for relevant offences, including a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction where the victim was a former partner or the current applicant. The firm is capable of handling these matters from first advice through to Tribunal review.

The firm's work on this problem is specific:

• Assessing the conviction. The firm reviews the police checks, court record and sentence to confirm whether the conviction is for a relevant offence under regulation 1.20KC(2) and whether there is a significant criminal record under regulation 1.20KD.
• Advising before the sponsorship form. The firm advises on the consent to disclose question and the consequences of each answer before the form is completed.
• Police checks. The firm manages the Australian and foreign checks, the 28 day guidance and any foreign check that cannot be obtained.
• Regulation 1.20KC(4) submissions. The firm prepares submissions addressing time since the sentence, rehabilitation evidence, the best interests of any children and the relationship, using each client's own account and documents.
• Responding to the invitation to comment. The firm prepares the sponsor's response when the Department raises grounds under regulation 1.20KC(3).
• Preparing for the interview. The firm explains to the applicant what the interview is for, while respecting that the applicant speaks for themselves.
• Review. Where a visa is refused, the firm prepares the Tribunal application, evidence and submissions.

The firm's Principal Lawyer, Weiwei Zhang, oversees its partner visa practice. More about the firm is on the about page, on the partner visa lawyers page and on its home page.

If a partner visa sponsor domestic violence conviction affects your application, book a consultation online. You can also call 1300 040 300.