Partner visa Australia.

Two, made together. The 820 application must be made at the same time and place as the 801 application, and offshore the 309 must be made at the same time and place as the 100. The visa application charge is payable on the permanent visa application only; the temporary one carries a nil charge. Our visa fee calculator works out the current amount for you and your family.

The temporary visa is decided first. The permanent stage is decided later.

Schedule 1, items 1214C(3)(a), 1124B(2), 1220A(3)(c), 1129(2)

The Prospective Marriage visa, subclass 300. You must have met in person, be known to each other personally, and both be free to marry.

The visa runs for between 9 and 15 months, and you marry during that period, then apply for the partner visa.

The applicant must be outside Australia when the subclass 300 application is made. Current law permits the subclass 300 to be granted while the applicant is either in or outside Australia.

Schedule 2, Part 300

A dependent child can be included. The Regulations define a dependent child as the child or step-child of the person who either has not turned 18, or has turned 18 and is dependent on that person, or is incapacitated for work through the total or partial loss of bodily or mental functions.

The definition also carries an exclusion: a child or step-child who is engaged to be married, or who has a spouse or de facto partner, falls outside it regardless of age.

Where a child has another parent, arrangements about the child’s departure and care are a separate question from the visa criteria, and they should be dealt with before lodgement rather than after.

reg 1.03, definition of dependent child

No. The Act recognises both a spouse and a de facto partner, and the partner visas are open to either.

For a partner visa application, the de facto relationship generally must have existed for the 12 months immediately before application, unless an exception in regulation 2.03A applies.

s.5F, s.5CB · reg 2.03A

Not necessarily. The 12-month requirement does not apply where the relationship is registered under a State or Territory law prescribed for this purpose. Do not assume that every form of relationship registration satisfies the migration provision.

There is also an exception where compelling and compassionate circumstances can be established for the purposes of regulation 2.03A.

Check which exception applies, and whether the particular registration scheme is a prescribed one, before lodging. Our page on the registered relationships laws lists the State and Territory laws that are prescribed.

reg 2.03A · Acts Interpretation Act 1901 s.2E · Registered Relationships Regulations 2019, s 5

Four areas, set out in the Regulations:

• the financial aspects of the relationship;
• the nature of the household;
• the social aspects of the relationship;
• the nature of your commitment to each other.

The Regulations require the Department to consider all of the circumstances of the relationship, including these four areas. The type and weight of evidence will differ from couple to couple.

reg 1.15A(3)

There is no prescribed number of documents.

The evidence should address the relationship as a whole and should be consistent across the financial, household, social and commitment aspects. The quality, timing and consistency of the evidence usually matter more than the volume.

Contemporaneous records can be particularly useful, because they show how the relationship was conducted at the relevant time. Later statements can also be important where they explain gaps, unusual circumstances or how the relationship developed.

No. Nothing is compulsory simply because it is commonly used.

A joint bank account can be useful financial evidence, but couples arrange their finances in different ways. The question is whether the evidence as a whole supports the claimed relationship and explains how the couple manages their financial life.

No. Statements from friends and family can support the social and overall relationship evidence, but they do not replace evidence about the couple's own financial arrangements, household, social recognition, commitment and relationship history.

Not always. The statutory definitions require that the couple live together, or do not live separately and apart on a permanent basis.

Temporary or practical separation for work, study or visa reasons can therefore be consistent with the definition. The reason for living apart, and the way the relationship continued, should be properly evidenced.

s.5F(2)(c), s.5CB(2)(c)

No. The relationship is only one part of the assessment. Before lodging, you also need to check whether the application can be validly made in Australia.

Issues that can matter include your current visa status, section 48, Schedule 3, a No Further Stay condition, previous partner visa refusals, and restrictions arising from certain regional provisional visas.

A genuine relationship with an Australian citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen does not override those application-validity rules.

Not until you have held that visa for three years. Where the applicant holds a subclass 491 (Skilled Work Regional (Provisional)) or subclass 494 (Skilled Employer Sponsored Regional (Provisional)) visa, or one of those visas was the applicant's last substantive visa, the Regulations require the applicant to have held that visa for at least three years before a valid subclass 820 application can be made.

This is separate from section 48 and should be checked on its own when working out whether an onshore partner application can be lodged. Older regional provisional visas have their own rules, including two-year periods.

Schedule 1, item 1214C(3)(h)

Three things about your own visa decide it, and each is explained on this page:

• The conditions on your visitor visa. If your grant notice shows condition 8503 (No Further Stay), you cannot make a valid partner application in Australia unless the condition has been waived, and that stays true after the visitor visa ends. See What if my visa has a No Further Stay condition?
• Whether section 48 affects you. See Can I apply for a partner visa if section 48 applies?
• Whether you still hold a substantive visa when you apply. If you do not, the Schedule 3 criteria come in. See What is Schedule 3, and when does it apply?

The relationship itself must also meet the partner visa requirements, as it would for any applicant.

Schedule 8, condition 8503

Not in law, as at the announcement. On 17 September 2026 the Minister for Home Affairs said: We’ll be attaching to visitor visas a no further stay provision to visitor visas. Now obviously you can’t do a no further stay with respect to a protection application, but we will have a no further stay with respect to other applications for people coming on visitor visas. He added that it will have no impact on anybody who is already here because this is about the issuing of future visas and the rules for future visas.

No instrument was made with the announcement, no commencement date was given, and the transcript does not name a condition number. What binds a visitor visa holder is the set of conditions printed on their own grant notice. Our update Announced, not law: a no further stay condition on future visitor visas has the detail.

Minister for Home Affairs, address to the National Press Club, 17 September 2026

Read your visitor visa grant notice when it arrives. The conditions listed on it, including any condition 8503, decide what you can apply for after you arrive, and a visa granted after any future change will carry whatever conditions the law then requires.

Then compare the two routes: the subclass 820 lodged in Australia, and the subclass 309 lodged from outside Australia. How they differ is set out under What if we are applying from outside Australia?

Schedule 8, condition 8503

Section 48 can apply to a person who is in Australia, does not hold a substantive visa, and since last entering Australia has had a visa application refused or a visa cancelled under one of the provisions listed in that section.

Section 48 prevents that person from applying in Australia for most visa classes. The Regulations, however, prescribe Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) and Partner (Residence) (Class BS) for section 48 purposes.

So being section 48 affected does not automatically prevent an 820/801 application. The additional validity requirements that apply to a section 48 applicant still have to be met, and Schedule 3 may also be relevant if the applicant does not hold a substantive visa.

s.48 · reg 2.12(a), (b)

Potentially. A Student, Visitor or other non-partner refusal after your last entry can cause section 48 to apply once you no longer hold a substantive visa.

Because the partner classes are prescribed for section 48 purposes, section 48 does not by itself prevent an 820/801 application. The special Class BS validity requirements still have to be met, and because a person holding only a bridging visa does not hold a substantive visa, Schedule 3 will usually also need to be considered.

Any No Further Stay condition or other application restriction must also be checked before lodgement.

s.48 · Schedule 1, item 1124B

Possibly not, and it turns on which visa was refused.

If section 48 applies to you, Schedule 1 item 1124B contains an additional validity requirement: since last entering Australia you must not have been refused one of the partner, spouse or interdependency visas listed in that provision. The list is subclasses 100, 110, 309, 310, 801, 814, 820 and 826.

Two points follow. It is not simply a rule about whether you previously had an “onshore refusal”. And a previous subclass 309 or 100 refusal can be relevant, even though those are offshore partner subclasses.

By contrast, a previous Student or Visitor refusal can cause section 48 to apply, but is not itself one of the listed partner refusals.

If that requirement is not met, the problem goes to the validity of the new application. A Schedule 3 compelling-reasons argument does not waive it.

The same item also requires the sponsoring partner's approved form and two statutory declarations to be provided when the application is made.

Schedule 1, item 1124B(3)(e)

No. The Act provides that a person who leaves and re-enters the migration zone while holding a bridging visa is taken to have been continuously in the migration zone for section 48 purposes.

A short trip on a Bridging Visa B therefore does not erase the earlier refusal.

s.48(3)

They are separate questions. Section 48 is principally an application restriction. Schedule 3 contains additional grant criteria that can apply to an onshore partner applicant who did not hold a substantive visa when the application was made.

For the ordinary subclass 820 pathway, an applicant without a substantive visa generally needs to satisfy criteria 3001, 3003 and 3004 unless the Minister is satisfied there are compelling reasons for not applying them. Those criteria deal with the timing of the application, why the applicant does not hold a substantive visa, and compliance with visa conditions.

A person can be both section 48 affected and Schedule 3 affected. Assess them separately.

cl 820.211; Schedule 3, criteria 3001, 3003, 3004

Not automatically, but it can make the application substantially more complex.

Criterion 3001 ordinarily looks at whether the application was validly made within 28 days after the relevant day. The subclass 820 criteria allow the Minister not to apply criteria 3001, 3003 and 3004 where satisfied there are compelling reasons for not applying them.

Marriage to, or a relationship with, an Australian citizen or permanent resident does not automatically establish compelling reasons. The circumstances and the evidence are assessed in the individual case.

Schedule 3, criterion 3001

Generally yes, because a bridging visa is not a substantive visa.

What the rule turns on is whether you hold a substantive visa when the partner application is made. A substantive visa generally means a visa other than a bridging visa, a criminal justice visa or an enforcement visa.

If you hold only a bridging visa and no substantive visa, Schedule 3 will generally need to be considered for an ordinary subclass 820 application.

s.5(1) definition of substantive visa

Not unless the condition has been waived. The rule reaches further than the visa you hold now: if you have held a visa with condition 8503 since you last entered Australia, an application for a partner visa made in Australia is invalid until the condition is waived, even after that visa has ended. For a partner visa only one of the waiver routes is any use to you.

The Regulations allow condition 8503 to be waived where, since the visa was granted, compelling and compassionate circumstances have developed over which you had no control and which resulted in a major change to your circumstances. That is the route a partner applicant runs on.

The skilled waiver route does not help a partner application, and it can make things worse. A separate provision allows 8503 to be waived where the holder genuinely intends to apply for a General Skilled Migration visa or a subclass 186, 187, 188, 191, 482 or 494. Partner visas are not on that list. And where 8503 has been waived on that route, an application for a substantive visa is valid only if it is for one of those same visas, so a partner application lodged afterwards would not be a valid application at all.

Check which condition is on the visa, and which waiver route applies, before lodging anything. How the conditions and the routes work is set out in our visitor and short stay guide.

Schedule 8, condition 8503 · reg 2.05(4), reg 2.05(4AA), reg 2.07AG · s.41(2)(a), s.41(2A), s.46(1A)

The first question is always which visa is currently in effect. Lodging a partner visa does not switch off the conditions on the visa you already hold.

Check your actual visa conditions in VEVO. Bridging visa outcomes differ where the applicant does not hold a substantive visa, has a previous refusal or cancellation, or is affected by section 48 or Schedule 3.

Not immediately in every case.

Lodging an 820/801 does not, by itself, cancel your existing visa or remove its conditions. If you still hold a substantive visa – Visitor, Student, a temporary work visa – that visa normally remains in effect until it expires or otherwise ceases, and you must keep complying with its conditions.

A Bridging Visa A may be granted in connection with the partner application, but it generally becomes relevant only when the substantive visa ceases.

For an ongoing 820/801 application, a BVA or BVB granted in association with that application is specified by Ministerial instrument as a class carrying nil conditions. Once that bridging visa is in effect there is no visa condition restricting work or study.

cl 010.611(1)(c), cl 020.611(1)(b)

Not merely because the partner application was lodged.

If the Visitor visa is still in effect and carries condition 8101 or another condition preventing work, you must keep complying with it.

When the Visitor visa ceases and the partner-associated BVA comes into effect, that BVA generally carries nil conditions, so there is no work restriction on it.

The question is not whether a BVA has been granted, but which visa is currently in effect.

Schedule 8, condition 8101 · cl 010.611(1)(c)

No. Student visa conditions continue to apply for as long as the Student visa remains in effect. Lodging a partner visa does not immediately replace it with a Bridging Visa A.

Once the Student visa ceases and the partner-associated BVA comes into effect, that BVA generally has nil conditions. Until then, comply with the conditions shown against the Student visa in VEVO.

Do not assume so.

A person to whom section 48 applies may still be able to make a valid Partner (Residence) Class BS application, because that class is prescribed for section 48 purposes. But an applicant who does not hold a substantive visa when the partner application is made does not fall within the ordinary BVA criterion, which depends on having held a substantive visa at the time of the substantive application.

Depending on your immigration status, the bridging visa position may instead involve a Bridging Visa C or Bridging Visa E. The unrestricted work rights attaching to a partner-associated BVA or BVB do not automatically extend to every BVC or BVE holder.

s.48 · reg 2.12; Schedule 2, Part 010

Not automatically. A BVC granted in the ordinary circumstances of an applicant who does not hold a substantive visa can be subject to condition 8101 – no work.

Where a BVC carries 8101, the Regulations provide a pathway to apply for a further BVC where the Minister is satisfied the applicant has a compelling need to work, which for this purpose generally means financial hardship. If the criteria are met, a further BVC can be granted without condition 8101, though other applicable conditions still need checking.

We can prepare that application. We cannot promise the outcome.

cl 030.614; Schedule 8, condition 8101

No. Work rights are not automatic merely because a valid partner application has been lodged.

The conditions on the BVE you already hold need to be checked. Where a BVE was granted in relation to a valid substantive visa application and is subject to condition 8101, the Regulations provide a pathway to seek a further BVE where the Minister is satisfied there is a compelling need to work. Financial hardship can establish that need.

The outcome depends on the person's bridging visa history and the particular statutory criteria.

Where work rights depend on establishing financial hardship, the evidence should show the person's actual financial position. That may include available bank funds, rent and living expenses, financial support available from the partner or family, debts or liabilities, employment opportunities, and other circumstances affecting the person's ability to support themselves.

What is required depends on the particular bridging visa and the circumstances. Having an Australian partner does not by itself defeat a hardship claim; the household circumstances are assessed as a whole.

The Regulations prescribe nil conditions for the subclass 820, so the visa itself contains no condition restricting work or study. It also permits travel to and entry into Australia while it remains in effect, pending the 801 outcome or withdrawal of that application.

Schedule 2, Part 820

If you are relying on a Bridging Visa A, that is not the visa used to leave Australia and return.

A person holding a BVA or BVB may apply for a Bridging Visa B where the criteria are met, including substantial reasons for wishing to leave and re-enter while the substantive application is processed. A BVB granted in association with an ongoing 820 application also carries nil conditions.

So it is wrong to say you cannot travel while an 820 is pending, and equally wrong to leave and expect to return on the BVA.

Schedule 2, Part 020

Generally a Bridging Visa B applicant must currently hold a Bridging Visa A or Bridging Visa B.

Someone relying on a BVC or BVE should get advice before leaving Australia, and should not assume they can obtain a BVB or return merely because the partner application is still pending. This matters most in Schedule 3 and section 48 matters.

Travelling while an onshore partner application is pending does not automatically mean the application is withdrawn, but the effect on your bridging visa and on your ability to return must be checked before you leave.

Under the current grant provisions the applicant may be in or outside Australia when the 820 is granted, provided they are not in immigration clearance. Travel can still materially affect your bridging visa, your lawful status, Schedule 3 or other factual circumstances, and how the Department communicates with you.

Schedule 2, Part 820

The subclass 309/100 pathway is applied for while the applicant is outside Australia. The applicant must be outside Australia when the application is made, but the subclass 309 can now be granted while the applicant is either in or outside Australia.

The relationship criteria are similar to the onshore pathway, but the application and visa criteria should be checked for the applicant's own circumstances.

Schedule 1, items 1220A(3)(b), 1129(3)(c); Schedule 2, Part 309

Potentially, if you separately hold or obtain a visa that allows the visit.

Lodging a subclass 309 application does not itself give a right to enter, remain or work in Australia while it is pending. If you are lawfully in Australia on another visa when the 309 is ready for decision, the subclass 309 can now be granted while you are in Australia.

Possibly. Regulation 1.20J imposes numerical and five-year limits on partner sponsorships. Broadly, sponsorship will generally be affected where two other people have already been granted relevant partner permissions based on the sponsor's sponsorship.

A five-year restriction can also apply where another person has previously been granted a relevant partner permission based on that sponsorship, or where the sponsor themselves previously obtained a relevant partner permission.

The regulation contains a discretion to approve a sponsorship despite the ordinary limits where there are compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor.

Check the previous visa type, the application dates and the grant history, rather than counting how many people the sponsor has previously “sponsored”.

reg 1.20J

A previous partner permission granted to the proposed sponsor can engage the five-year sponsorship restriction.

The relevant dates are not necessarily just the sponsor's present permanent-residence grant date. Their earlier partner visa application and permission history should be checked. Compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor can be relevant to the statutory discretion.

reg 1.20J

Not every conviction prevents sponsorship.

The Regulations identify relevant offences for partner sponsorship. Where a sponsor has a significant criminal record in relation to a relevant offence, the Minister must generally refuse the sponsorship unless satisfied that it is reasonable to approve it, having regard to the matters specified in the Regulations.

The Department can request Australian and overseas police checks from a sponsor, so a sponsor's criminal history should be assessed before assuming the sponsorship can be approved.

reg 1.20KB

Generally at least two years from the date the combined application was made.

That is the ordinary subclass 801 and 100 criterion: at least two years must have passed since the combined partner application was made before the ordinary permanent-stage criterion is met, subject to the statutory exceptions.

That is an eligibility point for permanent-stage consideration. It is not a guarantee that the Department will decide the permanent visa exactly two years after lodgement. Actual processing time depends on the individual application. Our partner visa processing times page shows the Department’s current figures, and our Direction 117 guide explains the order applications are reached in.

Where the long-term partner relationship provisions apply, the ordinary two-year requirement may not apply, but the other permanent-stage criteria still have to be satisfied.

cl 801.221, cl 100.221

The permanent stage forms part of the combined partner application, so a new ordinary partner visa application is not lodged and there is no second ordinary partner visa application charge.

Temporary partner visa holders are required to provide updated information and supporting documents for the permanent-stage assessment through the Department's process when eligible or requested.

Get advice before applying for or accepting another substantive visa.

The permanent partner pathway includes requirements concerning the temporary partner visa held by the applicant. A later visa grant can replace an existing visa and may affect eligibility for the permanent stage.

No. The usual rule is that at least two years must have passed since the application was made before the permanent stage is decided. There are exceptions written into the same clause.

The two-year requirement does not apply where the applicant was in a long‑term partner relationship with the sponsoring partner at the time the application was made.

The Regulations also expressly allow the permanent visa to be granted less than two years after the application where the death or the relationship-ceased provisions apply.

Schedule 2, cl 801.221(2)(d), (6A), (7) · cl 100.221(2)(c)

There is a provision for this. Where a subclass 820 ceased on notification of a decision refusing the 801, and the ART has either remitted that decision for reconsideration or determined that the applicant satisfies the criteria apart from holding an 820, the applicant can still meet the requirements.

In other words, losing the 820 on refusal does not by itself put the permanent visa out of reach once the Tribunal has acted.

Schedule 2, cl 801.221(8)

Yes. Changes in relationship status and other material circumstances should be updated with the Department.

Marriage does not create a new partner visa application, but the application record and the supporting evidence should accurately reflect the current relationship.

Notify the Department and update the application with the child's details and supporting documents.

The process depends on where the child was born and on the parents' visa or citizenship status. Do not assume a newborn is automatically included in every migration application without notification.

Generally, a new partner cannot simply be substituted into the existing partner visa application. The sponsoring relationship is central to the visa criteria.

If the original relationship ends, the family-violence, death or child-related provisions may be relevant depending on the circumstances. A new relationship ordinarily requires a fresh assessment of what pathway is available.

Ordinarily the relevant criteria require the relationship with the sponsoring partner to continue. The Regulations contain important exceptions.

Depending on the subclass and the stage of the application, the application may still be able to continue where the sponsoring partner has died and the statutory requirements are met, where the relationship has ended and the family-violence provisions apply, or where specified child-related circumstances exist.

These provisions can be relevant at different stages of the process. They are not confined to people who have already been granted the temporary visa.

If the relationship ends, obtain advice promptly about what must be notified, how, and any applicable timeframe. Do not delay a notification that is required by law merely in order to obtain advice first.

cl 801.221; Division 1.5

There is a provision for the temporary stage as well, not only the permanent one. For the subclass 820, an applicant meets the requirements where they would continue to meet the ordinary requirements except that the sponsoring partner has died, and the Minister is satisfied the applicant would have continued to be the spouse or de facto partner had the sponsoring partner not died.

So the death of a sponsor does not automatically end either stage. What changes is what has to be proved.

Schedule 2, cl 820.221(2)

Not necessarily. The Regulations contemplate exactly this. For the subclass 801, an applicant who holds a subclass 820 and would otherwise meet the ordinary requirements except that the sponsoring partner has died can still meet the criteria, if the Minister is satisfied the applicant would have continued to be the spouse or de facto partner of the sponsoring partner if the sponsoring partner had not died.

The offshore 309/100 has its own version of the same provision.

What has to be shown is that the relationship was continuing at the date of death and would have continued. That is a question of evidence, and the evidence needed is the same kind already being gathered for the visa.

Schedule 2, cl 801.221(5) · cl 100.221(3)

There may be. Separately from the family-violence provisions, the Regulations provide for an applicant whose relationship has ceased where the applicant has custody or joint custody of, or access to, at least one child in respect of whom the former sponsor has been granted joint custody or access by a court, or has a residence or contact order under the Family Law Act 1975, or has a child maintenance obligation.

This is a distinct route with its own requirements. It is not automatic, and it turns on the court orders or maintenance obligations that actually exist.

Schedule 2, cl 801.221(6) · cl 100.221(4AA)

No. Australian partner visa law contains family-violence provisions so that an eligible applicant is not required to remain in a violent relationship solely because of the visa process.

Eligibility depends on the subclass, the stage of the application, whether the relationship has ended, who experienced the family violence, who committed it, and the evidentiary requirements in the Regulations. For an onshore subclass 820 applicant, the family-violence provisions can be relevant at the temporary stage, before the 820 has been granted.

The Department publishes the requirements on its subclass 820 page. If you are in immediate danger, call 000.

Division 1.5, reg 1.21 to 1.27

It is defined, and there are four routes. A person is taken to have experienced family violence where:

• a court has granted an injunction under s.114(1)(a), (b) or (c) of the Family Law Act 1975 against the alleged perpetrator, on the alleged victim’s application;
• a court has made an order under a State or Territory law against the alleged perpetrator for the alleged victim’s protection, and that order was made after the alleged perpetrator was given an opportunity to be heard or to make submissions;
• a court has convicted the alleged perpetrator of an offence of violence against the alleged victim, or recorded a finding of guilt; or
• the claim is a non-judicially determined claim, which is the route where no court has dealt with the violence.

In each of the first three, the violence, or part of it, must have occurred while the relationship existed.

reg 1.23

Yes. That is what the non-judicially determined route is for. The evidence required is a statutory declaration under regulation 1.25, together with the type and number of items of evidence the Minister specifies by legislative instrument.

The declaration is made by the spouse, de facto partner or prospective spouse of the alleged perpetrator, and the Regulations set out what it must contain: the allegation, the name of the person alleged to have committed the violence, and the evidence the allegation rests on. Where the conduct was towards someone else, the declaration must name that person and identify the relationships.

Because the required items are set by instrument rather than by the Regulations themselves, the current instrument is what governs. Check it before assembling anything.

reg 1.24 · reg 1.25

On a non-judicially determined claim, if the Minister is not satisfied that the alleged victim experienced the violence, the Regulations require the Minister to seek the opinion of an independent expert.

The Minister must take an independent expert’s opinion on the matter to be correct for the purpose of deciding whether the criterion is satisfied.

On that question the expert’s opinion binds the decision.

reg 1.23(10)

The Regulations restrict where these documents can be used. A document listed in the table in regulation 1.27 is not admissible in evidence before a court or tribunal, other than in judicial review or merits review of a refusal of the visa the claim was made in, or in a prosecution of the maker of the statutory declaration under s.11 of the Statutory Declarations Act 1959. This is general information: we are a registered migration practice and not a law firm, and court proceedings are work we refer to a lawyer (see migration agent or lawyer).

A statutory declaration carries the consequences of one, including that prosecution provision.

reg 1.27

Read the clause carefully, because the offshore provision is not identical to the onshore one. For the subclass 100, the family-violence route requires that the applicant has entered Australia after making the application.

The equivalent subclass 801 provision contains no such requirement, because an 820 applicant is already in Australia.

That difference decides whether the provision is available at all, so it is worth checking before anything else is done.

Schedule 2, cl 100.221(4) · cl 801.221(6)

False or misleading information, or bogus documents, can engage public interest criterion 4020. That can arise from relationship evidence or from other parts of the application, including identity, immigration history and other supporting material.

An explanation given up front is a different thing from an omission found later.

Schedule 4, PIC 4020

Some partner visa refusals are reviewable by the Administrative Review Tribunal, but not every refusal carries the same review rights, and the person entitled to apply is not always the visa applicant.

The decision letter, the type of partner application, the applicant's location and the sponsorship circumstances should all be checked immediately.

Send us the complete decision letter and the email or other notification by which it was sent. Migration review periods are statutory and are calculated by reference to the applicable notification rules, not simply by the date printed at the top of the refusal letter.

See our guide to refusals and review.

For an offshore partner visa refusal, the review right belongs to the sponsor, not the visa applicant. The Act provides that for a decision covered by s.338(5) or (8), an application for review may only be made by the sponsor or nominator referred to in the subsection concerned.

For an onshore refusal such as an 820, it is the other way round: the application may only be made by the non-citizen who is the subject of the decision.

The refusal letter arrives in the applicant’s matter while the person who must lodge the review is in Australia. Identify who that is before the period in s.347(3) runs.

s.347A(1)(a) and (b) · s.338(2), (5)

The Act sets the period and then removes the power to extend it.

An application must be made within 28 days after the day the applicant is notified of the decision, or within 14 days if the applicant is in immigration detention on the day they are notified.

The Tribunal’s general power to extend time does not apply here: the Act states that Section 19 (ART may extend period) of the ART Act does not apply in relation to reviewable migration decisions or reviewable protection decisions.

A missed deadline is therefore not something the Tribunal can forgive. When the applicant was notified is set by how the decision was notified under the Act, and establishing that date is the first step.

s.347(3) · s.347(5)