Checking Sponsorship History Before Lodging Subclass 835 in 2026

Before you lodge a Subclass 835 (Remaining Relative) application, check one thing that can void the whole case: whether the person nominated as your sponsor — or that person's spouse or de facto partner — has already been granted, or has already successfully sponsored someone for, a Subclass 104, 115, 806 or 835 visa. Under regulation 1.20K of the Migration Regulations 1994, as published on the Australian Government Federal Register of Legislation, that history is a bar to sponsoring again, and the Department of Home Affairs lists Subclass 835 among the other family visas on its visa listing page. Clauses 835.213 and 835.227 require the sponsorship to be valid when you apply and to have been approved and still be in force when the decision is made, so a defect in the sponsor's history can surface late and cost years of queue time.

What does regulation 1.20K actually prohibit?

The restriction is narrower than "one sponsorship per person" but wider than most applicants expect. It is written around two kinds of past involvement with the four listed subclasses: having been granted one of those visas yourself, and having successfully sponsored someone else for one of them.

Policy guidance for case officers treats the check as mandatory rather than discretionary, because a sponsorship that fails regulation 1.20K cannot be approved no matter how strong the rest of the application is. This is one of the few parts of a Subclass 835 case where the deciding fact often sits entirely outside the applicant's own documents — it sits in a relative's history, sometimes decades old.

Whose history has to be checked — the relative, or the spouse too?

Both. Clause 835.213 allows sponsorship by the Australian relative, or by that relative's spouse or de facto partner, if the partner is living with the relative. Regulation 1.20K is applied across both people, so the record of a spouse or de facto partner can block a sponsorship just as effectively as the record of the relative.

Suppose an applicant intends to be sponsored by a sister who is an Australian permanent resident. The sister has never sponsored anyone. Her husband, however, sponsored his own brother for a Subclass 806 visa twenty years ago and that brother was granted the visa. On the terms described above, that is a history that has to be resolved before lodgement rather than after.

Which older subclasses count?

Four subclasses are in scope: 104, 115, 806 and 835. The first three are closed to new applications but remain relevant because the restriction is written around what happened in the past, not around what is available today. A relative who arrived in Australia as a remaining relative or on one of those older family visas may have no idea that the grant itself is part of the record that needs checking.

The practical consequence is that the question to ask is not "has anyone in this family sponsored someone recently?" but "has either of these two people ever been connected, as an applicant or as a sponsor, with a 104, 115, 806 or 835 visa?"

How do you check, step by step?

Write down the name of the Australian relative and, separately, the name of the person who is currently their spouse or de facto partner.
Ask the relative, in writing, whether they have ever been granted a Subclass 104, 115, 806 or 835 visa.
Ask the relative whether they have ever signed a sponsorship for someone else in one of those four subclasses.
Ask whether the sponsored person was actually granted the visa.
Put the same three questions to the spouse or de facto partner.
Look for the paperwork that would confirm each answer — old visa grant letters, visa labels in expired passports, and any correspondence about a sponsorship.
Check for gaps the answer might miss: a marriage name change, a first marriage that ended, or a sponsorship signed long ago and forgotten.
Write down what you found, and note the date you checked it.
If any answer is yes, or if anyone simply cannot remember, treat the sponsorship as at risk and read the next section.

What if the sponsor's history is unclear or the limit applies?

The option to look at first is a different sponsor, not a different argument. Clause 835.213 only requires the sponsor to be the Australian relative or that relative's spouse or de facto partner, so if one branch of the family is blocked, another qualifying relative may be able to sponsor — provided that person, and their partner, clear the same check. Confirming that the substitute sponsor is at least 18, a settled Australian citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen, and usually resident in Australia, is part of the same exercise. Policy guidance commonly treats "settled" as at least two years of residence in Australia, with the definition itself sitting in regulation 1.03.

This is general information about how the rules are written, not personalised advice for any particular family; where the history cannot be established from documents, the current text of the Migration Regulations 1994 and the Schedule 2 provisions for Part 835 are the authority to read, and professional advice is worth taking before money is committed.

Can a sponsorship problem be fixed after lodgement?

Sometimes. Policy guidance states that a sponsor can be changed at any time before the decision is made, and that only the new sponsor has to meet the requirements. That makes early checking far more valuable than late repair — a case that sits in a queue with an invalid sponsorship is still a case with an invalid sponsorship, and Subclass 835 is a category where policy guidance notes that capping and queuing provisions under sections 85 and 499 can apply.

The same guidance also records a continuing duty to notify the department of changes in circumstances, so a sponsor's status, relationship or residence should be re-checked as the case moves toward a decision rather than assumed to be frozen at the lodgement date.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the check cover a former spouse or ex-partner?

The provision is applied to the Australian relative and to that relative's current spouse or de facto partner as described in clause 835.213. Whether a former partner's history is caught depends on the wording of regulation 1.20K as currently in force, so read the current text rather than relying on a summary.

Does a sponsorship that was refused or withdrawn count?

The bar is expressed in terms of a visa having been granted and a sponsorship having been successful. A sponsorship that was never approved is therefore not the same thing, but the distinction should be confirmed against the regulation itself before lodgement.

Can my brother's wife sponsor me instead of my brother?

Yes, if she is the spouse or de facto partner of your Australian relative and is living with him, clause 835.213 allows her to sponsor. She must still meet the age, settled status and usual residence requirements, and her own sponsorship history is checked in exactly the same way.

Can we switch sponsors if we discover the problem later?

Policy guidance says a sponsor can be changed at any time before the decision is made, and that the new sponsor only has to satisfy the requirements themselves. The risk is not the change itself but the delay and queue position lost in the meantime.

Does an assurance of support still matter if the sponsorship history is clean?

Yes. Clause 835.222 requires that an assurance of support has been accepted by the Secretary of Social Services at the time of decision, and it is a separate requirement from the sponsorship itself.

What happens if the sponsorship was never valid?

Clause 835.227 requires the sponsorship to have been approved and still be in force when the decision is made. A sponsorship blocked by regulation 1.20K cannot satisfy that, so the application fails at decision even if everything else is in order.