Subclass 445 sponsorship in 2026: approval, registrable offences and family violence exceptions
How Subclass 445 sponsorship approval works in 2026, when registrable offences force refusal, and how the family violence exceptions apply.
Sponsorship is the part of a Dependent Child visa (Subclass 445) application that most often decides the outcome before anything else is considered: the child must be sponsored by the same person who sponsored or nominated their parent's permanent Partner visa application, and — as the Australian Department of Home Affairs states on its Dependent Child visa (Subclass 445) page (current as at July 2026) — the sponsorship must be approved before the visa can be granted. If the sponsor, or the sponsor's spouse or de facto partner, has a registrable offence charge before the courts, the Department says it will refuse the sponsorship and the visa application. The narrow escape hatches sit in clause 445.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which allow a different sponsor where the original nominator or sponsor has died, or where the relationship has ended and the visa-holding parent has asked to be considered under the family violence or parental arrangements provisions.
Who has to sponsor a Subclass 445 applicant?
The default rule has two limbs, one applying when the application is lodged and one applying when it is decided.
At lodgement, clause 445.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994 requires the applicant to be a dependent child of a visa-holding parent and to be sponsored by that parent's nominator or sponsor. In plain terms, the child's sponsor is the person on the sponsoring side of the parent's own Partner visa case — typically the Australian partner, rather than the parent who holds the temporary visa.
The Department's page states the same point in its own words: the child must be sponsored by the same person who sponsored or nominated their parent's permanent Partner visa application. The child must also be dependent on a parent who holds a Partner (Provisional) visa (subclass 309), a Partner visa (subclass 820), or another Subclass 445 visa, and must later apply to be added to that parent's permanent Partner visa application once the 445 is granted.
This is why the 445 is rarely a standalone solution. It hangs off the parent's temporary Partner visa and exists to bridge the child into the parent's permanent application.
Does the sponsorship have to be approved before the visa is granted?
Yes, and it has to still be approved on the day of the decision.
The Department's page says plainly that it must approve the sponsorship before the visa can be granted. Clause 445.224 of the Migration Regulations 1994 adds the timing element: the sponsorship must be approved and still in force at the time of decision. A sponsorship given early in the process but withdrawn, lapsed, or otherwise no longer effective by decision time leaves the application unable to meet the criterion.
For a reader, the practical consequence is that any change in the sponsor's circumstances during processing — a separation, a withdrawal of support, a death, a charge laid — is a matter that changes the sponsorship position, not merely a background detail.
Can someone else take over the sponsorship?
Only in the situations set out in clause 445.223. The clause is written as a set of alternatives to be tested at decision time, not as a general right to swap sponsors.
| What has happened | Who may sponsor at decision time | What must be established |
|---|---|---|
| Nothing has changed with the original sponsor (445.223(2)) | The nominator or sponsor of the visa-holding parent | The applicant continues to be sponsored by that person, and the sponsorship is approved and in force |
| The original nominator or sponsor has died; or the relationship has ceased and the visa-holding parent has requested consideration under the family violence or parental arrangements provisions (445.223(3)) | The visa-holding parent themselves | Death of the original nominator or sponsor; or cessation of the relationship plus a request for consideration under those provisions in connection with the parent's Subclass 100 or 801 case |
| The applicant is a dependent child of another Subclass 445 holder and the (3)(a) circumstances apply (445.223(4)) | The sponsor of the person seeking Subclass 100 or 801 consideration | Applicant's own parent holds a 445, and the family violence or parental arrangements request has been made in that chain |
Outside these pathways, there is no third option: the application needs the sponsorship required by the clause, whatever the personal arrangements between the adults involved might be.
What does the family violence exception actually require?
Clause 445.223(3) is satisfied on either of two bases.
First, the triggering event — either the death of the original nominator or sponsor, or the end of the relationship between the visa-holding parent and that nominator or sponsor. Where the relationship has ended, the visa-holding parent must also have requested consideration under the family violence provisions or the parental arrangements provisions as part of their own permanent Partner visa (Subclass 100 or 801) case.
The visa-holding parent may sponsor the child under clause 445.223(3) where the sponsor has died, or where the relationship has ended and that request has been made. The exception therefore follows the parent's own claim; it is not an independent remedy available simply because the adults have separated. Supporting material commonly turns on records of the family violence or parenting arrangements claim itself — court or third-party documents are typical examples of what decision-makers look to, according to PAM3.
Can grandparents step in as sponsors?
In a narrow chain, yes.
Clause 445.223(4) covers the case where the applicant is themselves the dependent child of a person who holds a Subclass 445 visa, and the circumstances in clause 445.223(3)(a) apply to that 445 holder. The sponsor may then be the sponsor of the person who has requested consideration for the Subclass 100 or 801 visa in that chain — in practice, the grandparent generation, where the visa-holding parent is themselves a Subclass 445 holder.
For most families this limb will simply not be relevant. It exists because the 445 can run through two generations of the same family, not because grandparents are a general fallback sponsor.
What if the sponsor has a registrable offence?
The Department's position is severe and is set out in two steps on the Dependent Child visa (Subclass 445) page.
If the sponsor, and/or their spouse or de facto partner (if any), have a pending registrable offence charge, the Department states it will refuse the sponsorship and the visa application. If there is a conviction for a registrable offence, the Department states it can approve the sponsorship only in very limited circumstances. It publishes further detail on its child protection measures page for this visa.
Regulation 1.20KB of the Migration Regulations 1994 is the provision relied on in PAM3 for refusing a sponsorship where the sponsor has an unresolved or convicted registrable offence, and it sits alongside the child protection scheme rather than operating separately from it. Because how those layers interact can turn on the wording in force at a given time, the useful habit is to read the Department's current page and the current text of the Regulations together.
One detail is easy to miss: the offence position is assessed for the sponsor and their spouse or de facto partner. A person who is personally clear can still leave the sponsorship exposed through their partner's charge or conviction.
What goes into a new sponsorship — Form 40CH and financial capacity?
A new sponsorship carries its own evidence burden, on top of whatever supports the family violence or parental arrangements claim.
PAM3 records that where a new sponsorship is required — for example, the visa-holding parent sponsoring after death or relationship breakdown — the new sponsorship is made on Form 40CH and must satisfy the financial capacity requirement in regulation 1.20 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which is framed as an ability to provide financial support for at least two years. It also notes that sponsorship can be refused outright where the sponsor's registrable offence position triggers regulation 1.20KB.
Form numbers and regulation wording are amended from time to time, so the reliable check is the current Migration Regulations 1994 text on the Federal Register of Legislation together with the Department's current page for the visa, rather than any older summary of either.
What else has to hold true between application and decision?
Sponsorship is the gatekeeper, but the other time-of-decision criteria have to survive to the same moment.
Under the Migration Regulations 1994, the parent must continue to be a visa-holding parent at decision time (clause 445.221) and the applicant must continue to be that parent's dependent child (clause 445.222). If the parent's permanent Partner visa has already been granted, the basis the 445 depends on has gone.
On the Department's page, the eligibility set also includes: being under 18, or over 18 years and financially dependent on the parent holding the temporary Partner or Dependent Child visa; meeting the health requirement; meeting the character requirement if aged 16 or over; signing the Australian values statement where aged 18 or over; arranging repayment of any debt to the Australian Government; having consent to travel where the child is under 18; and the Department retaining a discretion not to grant where it would not be in the best interests of an applicant under 18. Family members who are not travelling may still need to meet the health requirement.
Everything above is general information about the published rules, not legal advice about any individual case, and it cannot predict how a decision-maker will apply them to a particular set of facts. Because both the Department's published requirements and the text of the Regulations change, and because family violence and child protection matters turn heavily on evidence, anyone in that position should weigh their own situation against the official sources below and consider getting advice from a registered migration professional.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can the visa-holding parent simply take over the sponsorship after separating?
Not automatically. Under clause 445.223(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994, the visa-holding parent may sponsor only where the relationship has ceased and the parent has requested consideration under the family violence or parental arrangements provisions in connection with their Subclass 100 or 801 case.
Does the sponsorship have to be approved again if it was given at lodgement?
The requirement is that the sponsorship is approved and still in force at the time of decision under clause 445.224. If the original sponsorship has ceased during processing, a new, validly approved sponsorship covering the applicant is what the criterion looks for.
What is the effect of a pending registrable offence charge against the sponsor?
The Department states on its Dependent Child visa (Subclass 445) page that where the sponsor and/or their spouse or de facto partner have a pending registrable offence charge, it will refuse both the sponsorship and the visa application. A conviction is treated differently, with approval possible only in very limited circumstances.
Is Form 40CH needed if the original sponsor is continuing?
Form 40CH arises where a new sponsorship is required, such as the visa-holding parent taking over after death or relationship breakdown. It is accompanied by the financial capacity requirement in regulation 1.20 of the Migration Regulations 1994.
What happens to the 445 visa after the parent's permanent Partner visa is granted?
The Department's page requires the child to apply to be added to the parent's permanent Partner visa application once the 445 is granted. The visa itself depends on the parent holding a Subclass 309, 820 or 445 visa, so the bridging function ends when the parent's temporary visa comes to an end.
Does an offence involving the sponsor's de facto partner matter?
Yes. The Department's stated position covers the sponsor and/or their spouse or de facto partner (if any), so a charge or conviction attaching to either person feeds into the sponsorship decision.