Partner Visa After Bankruptcy: Can You Still Apply?

Partner visa bankruptcy is a worry for many couples. One partner has been made bankrupt, or is about to enter bankruptcy, and the couple fear the visa is now out of reach. The short answer is clear. A partner visa bankruptcy situation does not stop a couple from applying, because bankruptcy is not a partner visa criterion. What bankruptcy changes is the evidence. It removes joint loans, joint assets and often joint credit cards, which are the documents most couples rely on to prove the financial side of their relationship. This guide explains partner visa bankruptcy from the couple's side: what the law actually requires, what bankruptcy does to your finances, how to prove financial interdependence anyway, what you must disclose, how public interest criterion 4004 differs from bankruptcy, how overseas travel restrictions affect time together, and what to do if a partner visa is refused because the financial evidence looked thin.

My Migration Lawyers acts for couples across Australia on partner visa applications and refusals. If you want the wider picture first, our complete guide to partner visas in Australia explains every subclass and stage.

Can you apply for a partner visa after bankruptcy?

Yes, you can apply for a partner visa after bankruptcy, and you can also apply while one partner is still bankrupt. Nothing in the Migration Act 1958 or the Migration Regulations 1994 says that a bankrupt person cannot be a partner visa applicant or a sponsor. The partner visa bankruptcy question is therefore not "are we allowed to apply?" It is "can we still prove the relationship is genuine and continuing when bankruptcy has changed how we manage money?"

That distinction matters. Many couples delay lodging for years because they believe bankruptcy is a bar. Delay can cause its own problems. A visa may expire. A no further stay condition may apply. The applicant may become unlawful and face Schedule 3 criteria that would not have applied at all if the application had been lodged on time.

The same answer applies across the partner visa family:

• Subclass 820 and Subclass 801. The onshore temporary and permanent partner visas, explained in our Subclass 820 visa guide and our comparison of Subclass 820 and Subclass 801.
• Subclass 309 and Subclass 100. The offshore partner visas, where the couple often live apart during processing. See our Subclass 309 visa page.
• Subclass 300. The prospective marriage visa, where the couple intend to marry after arrival. See our Subclass 300 visa page.

For onshore couples, our Subclass 820 partner visa guide and our Subclass 820 visa service page set out the full requirements. In each of these visas, a partner visa bankruptcy matter is decided against the same relationship criteria, the same public interest criteria and the same integrity rules as any other application. The difference is in how carefully the evidence has to be built.

Does it matter which partner is bankrupt?

No, the legal answer does not change, but the practical issues do. If the Australian partner is bankrupt, the main issues are sponsorship capacity, overseas travel to see the applicant, and how the couple share money when one partner's finances are controlled by a trustee. If the applicant is bankrupt, which happens most often where the applicant has lived and worked in Australia for some time, the main issues are disclosure in the application, any debts owed to the Commonwealth, and the same gap in joint financial evidence.

In both cases, partner visa bankruptcy is an evidence and disclosure problem. It is not an eligibility problem.

Is bankruptcy a partner visa criterion?

No. Bankruptcy is not a partner visa criterion. To be granted a partner visa, the applicant must be the spouse or de facto partner of the sponsor, and the relationship must meet the definition in section 5F of the Migration Act for spouses or section 5CB for de facto partners. Both definitions require a mutual commitment to a shared life as spouses or partners to the exclusion of all others, a relationship that is genuine and continuing, and living together or not living separately and apart on a permanent basis.

When deciding whether those definitions are met, the decision maker must consider all the circumstances of the relationship, including four matters set out in regulation 1.15A(3) for married couples and regulation 1.09A(3) for de facto couples:

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

These are four aspects of one relationship. They are not four separate tests, and they are not four separate statements. The couple give one partner visa relationship statement, and the Department weighs all the evidence together. No single aspect is decisive. A weakness in the financial aspects can be balanced by strength in the household, social and commitment aspects.

For de facto couples, the partner visa bankruptcy analysis is the same, although the 12-month de facto rule and its exceptions, explained further in our article on whether you really need 12 months of de facto relationship, must also be met. That is the legal key to every partner visa bankruptcy case. Bankruptcy weakens the most common type of financial evidence. It does not remove the other three aspects, and it does not mean the financial aspects cannot be proved in other ways.

Which partner visa criteria can bankruptcy touch?

Bankruptcy can touch three areas of a partner visa application, and only indirectly:

• The relationship assessment. The financial aspects of the relationship are harder to prove when one partner cannot hold joint credit or own assets freely. Our guide on how to prove your relationship is genuine covers the four aspects in full.
• Public interest criterion 4020. If bankruptcy or debts are hidden where a question calls for them, the Department can find that false or misleading information was given.
• Public interest criterion 4004. If the applicant owes a debt to the Commonwealth, the visa cannot be granted unless appropriate arrangements have been made for payment. This is a different issue from bankruptcy, and it is explained later in this guide.

For the onshore visa, clause 820.223 requires the primary applicant to satisfy public interest criterion 4004, and clause 820.226 requires public interest criterion 4020. The prospective marriage visa includes both criteria in clause 300.223. These are standard criteria. They are not bankruptcy tests.

What does bankruptcy do to a couple's finances?

Bankruptcy changes how the bankrupt partner can hold money, own assets, borrow and travel, and each of those changes shows up in partner visa evidence. The facts below come from the Australian Financial Security Authority (AFSA), the Commonwealth agency that administers personal insolvency. A trustee manages the bankruptcy. The trustee may be the Official Trustee, which is part of AFSA, or a registered private trustee.

How long does bankruptcy last?

Bankruptcy normally lasts three years and one day from the day AFSA accepts the bankruptcy form. The trustee can lodge an objection to extend the bankruptcy, and AFSA states that a bankruptcy can be extended for up to eight years. The bankrupt person's name stays permanently on the National Personal Insolvency Index, which is a public register. AFSA also states that bankruptcy is generally recorded on a credit report for five years from the date of bankruptcy, or two years after it ends, whichever is later.

For partner visa bankruptcy planning, this means the effect on evidence can last well beyond the end of the bankruptcy. A couple may struggle to obtain a joint loan, a joint credit card or a lease in both names for years after discharge.

What happens to assets and bank accounts?

The trustee can take most assets the bankrupt person owns at the date of bankruptcy, including real estate. Where an asset is owned jointly, AFSA states that the trustee has an interest in the bankrupt person's share. The bankrupt person can usually keep ordinary household items of reasonable value, tools of trade up to a set value, and a vehicle used mainly for transport up to a set value.

AFSA also states that the trustee can take money held in a bank account at the date of bankruptcy, but money saved from income earned after bankruptcy belongs to the bankrupt person unless contributions are owed. A bankrupt person can continue to use a bank account, but their finances are closely watched.

For the couple, this often means:

• The family home is sold or was never bought. Joint ownership of real estate, which is the first item listed under the financial aspects, may be impossible.
• Joint assets are split or transferred. A jointly owned car or savings account may be dealt with by the trustee.
• The couple deliberately keep money separate. Many couples choose separate accounts so that the non-bankrupt partner's money is not mixed with the bankrupt estate.

None of these is evidence that the relationship is not genuine. Each is a lawful and sensible response to bankruptcy. The task in a partner visa bankruptcy application is to explain this clearly and prove the financial relationship through other documents.

Income contributions and credit

AFSA states that if a bankrupt person earns more than a set amount, they must pay 50 percent of the amount above that threshold to the trustee. The threshold depends on how many dependants the bankrupt person supports. AFSA also states that the trustee can only use the bankrupt person's own income to assess compulsory payments. A partner's income is not used to calculate the contribution.

Under AFSA's practice guidance on section 139K of the Bankruptcy Act 1966, a dependant is a person who lives with the bankrupt person, is wholly or partly dependent on them for economic support, and earns less than a prescribed amount. In some households, the partner of a bankrupt person is treated as a dependant. Where that is accurate, it may be relevant evidence of financial interdependence, because it is an account of the household given to a government agency.

AFSA also states that a bankrupt person who applies for credit over a set amount must tell the credit provider about the bankruptcy. In practice, joint credit is rarely available.

Overseas travel during bankruptcy

A bankrupt person must request permission from their trustee to leave Australia. AFSA states that the trustee can place restrictions on the travel approval, can hold the person's passport during the bankruptcy, and that travelling overseas without permission, or beyond the approved destinations and dates, is an offence. That restriction has a direct effect on offshore partner visa cases, which is discussed later in this guide. Where the applicant is the bankrupt partner and is in Australia on a bridging visa, two separate permissions may be needed before travel: the trustee's permission under the bankruptcy, and a Bridging B visa under migration law. A partner visa bankruptcy plan should account for both.

How does the Department assess the financial aspects of the relationship?

The Department assesses the financial aspects of the relationship by looking at five matters listed in the regulations, and none of them requires a joint loan or a joint asset. Regulation 1.15A(3)(a), and the matching de facto provision in regulation 1.09A(3)(a), list:

• Any joint ownership of real estate or other major assets.
• Any joint liabilities.
• The extent of any pooling of financial resources, especially in relation to major financial commitments.
• Whether one person in the relationship owes any legal obligation in respect of the other.
• The basis of any sharing of day-to-day household expenses.

The words "any" and "the extent of" are important. The law asks the decision maker to look at what exists. It does not say that a relationship without joint assets fails. The Department's own policy on assessing spouse and de facto relationships recognises that some couples maintain separate accounts, and states that in both joint and personal accounts there should be evidence of income or spending on shared costs such as utilities, rent and mortgage.

That policy statement is the foundation of every partner visa bankruptcy evidence strategy. A couple who cannot hold a joint account can still prove that each of them pays toward the shared life. Our partner visa document checklist and our Subclass 820 evidence checklist show the documents decision makers usually expect, and our article on preparing evidence of a genuine relationship explains how to organise them.

Why bankruptcy can look like a weak relationship on paper

A decision maker reading a partner visa bankruptcy file without an explanation may see separate accounts, no joint assets, no joint debts and no shared credit. Those are the same facts that appear in refusals where the Department found that the couple were "financially independent" of each other or showed "limited sharing of financial resources". Without context, bankruptcy evidence can look like a couple who keep their lives apart. With context, it shows a couple who protected each other through a financial crisis. The difference lies in the explanation and the supporting documents.

How do you prove financial interdependence during partner visa bankruptcy?

You prove financial interdependence during partner visa bankruptcy by showing how the couple actually share money, day to day and over time, using documents that do not depend on joint credit or joint ownership. The question under the regulations is not whether the couple have a joint mortgage. It is whether they pool their resources and share the costs of a common life. That can be shown in many lawful ways.

Day-to-day household expenses

The basis of sharing day-to-day household expenses is the most important financial matter in a partner visa bankruptcy application, because bankruptcy does not stop it. Couples can show:

• Rent and housing costs. Bank statements showing rent paid from one or both accounts, a lease, rent receipts, or board paid to a family member.
• Utilities. Electricity, gas, water, internet and phone accounts, with evidence of who pays them.
• Groceries and household spending. Regular supermarket, pharmacy and household purchases on either partner's account.
• Transfers between partners. Regular transfers from one partner to the other with consistent descriptions, such as "rent", "groceries" or "bills".
• Insurance and vehicle costs. Car insurance, registration and fuel for a vehicle the couple both use.

Where only one partner earns, the partner visa bankruptcy evidence should show that income being used for both. Where both earn, it should show how the costs are divided. Couples should not invent a pattern that did not exist. The goal is to show the real pattern clearly, with documents that match the relationship statement.

Separate accounts are not a problem if the spending is shared

Separate accounts are common in partner visa bankruptcy cases and they are not a reason for refusal on their own. The Department's policy expressly recognises that some couples keep separate accounts and directs the decision maker to look at whether the accounts show income or spending on shared costs. A couple should therefore present each partner's statements together and point out the shared costs, rather than leaving the decision maker to search through hundreds of pages.

A short schedule that lists which shared bills each partner pays, with page references to the bank statements, often makes the financial relationship clear in a way that raw statements do not.

When the non-bankrupt partner carries the household

In many partner visa bankruptcy matters, the non-bankrupt partner pays most of the shared costs while the bankrupt partner rebuilds. That arrangement is evidence of commitment, not of a weak relationship. The regulations ask about pooling of resources and the basis of sharing expenses. A partner who supports the other through bankruptcy is pooling resources in the most practical sense.

The relationship statement should explain the arrangement in plain words. For example, it may say that one partner pays the rent and bills while the other pays income contributions to the trustee and buys groceries, and that the couple agreed to this to protect the household. Decision makers have accepted arrangements where one partner relies on the other. Tribunal decisions in the database of partner visa remittals include a case where the reported issue was that the applicant was "wholly reliant" on the sponsor's income to meet day-to-day needs, and the matter was remitted.

Major financial commitments without joint credit

Pooling of financial resources "especially in relation to major financial commitments" can be shown even when joint credit is not available. Examples include:

• Savings for a shared purpose. Money saved toward a bond, a wedding, a car or the visa application itself, with evidence of where the money came from.
• Payment of the visa application charge. Evidence of who paid the charge and from which account.
• Large purchases. Furniture, appliances or a car bought by one partner for the household.
• Wills and nominations. A will, or a superannuation or life insurance beneficiary nomination naming the other partner.
• Powers of attorney. The Department's policy lists a power of attorney as an example of a legal obligation one partner may owe in respect of the other.

These documents are particularly useful in partner visa bankruptcy cases because they show long-term planning and trust without requiring any credit approval.

Using bankruptcy documents as evidence

Documents from the bankruptcy itself can support the relationship, provided they are accurate and consistent with the visa application. If the bankrupt partner has told the trustee that they live with their partner, that the partner is a dependant, or how household costs are shared, those statements were made to a government agency for a different purpose and can carry weight. If the non-bankrupt partner has helped pay income contributions or debts, that may show the pooling of resources.

The same documents can also cause harm. If the bankruptcy papers describe a different address, a different household or a single person living alone during a period when the couple claim to have lived together, the decision maker will see the inconsistency. Before any bankruptcy document is used in a partner visa bankruptcy application, it should be checked against the relationship statement, the application forms and every other document. Inconsistency is a more serious problem than missing evidence.

Explaining the financial gap in the relationship statement

The relationship statement should deal with the bankruptcy directly. Silence invites the decision maker to draw the wrong inference. A short, factual paragraph is usually enough. It should explain when the bankruptcy began, why the couple keep accounts separate, how they share household costs, and how they plan to manage money once the bankruptcy ends.

The statement is the couple's own evidence. A lawyer can review it against the documents, identify gaps and inconsistencies, and ask the couple to correct and confirm their own account. A lawyer cannot write facts that did not happen. Our guide to writing a partner visa relationship statement explains structure and content in detail.

Leaning on the other three aspects

Because the financial evidence is limited in most partner visa bankruptcy cases, the nature of the household, the social aspects and the nature of the commitment should be as strong as the couple's real circumstances allow. Shared living arrangements, shared housework, shared care of children, joint social activities, travel together, contact with each other's families and plans for the future all count.

Form 888 supporting statements from friends and family who know about the bankruptcy and saw how the couple handled it can be valuable, because they speak to commitment in a hard period. Our article on Form 888 example answers and common mistakes explains what a useful statement contains.

What must you disclose about bankruptcy in a partner visa application?

You must answer every question in the partner visa application and related forms honestly and completely, and where a question calls for bankruptcy, debts or financial circumstances, the bankruptcy must be disclosed. A partner visa bankruptcy is not itself a reason for refusal. Hiding it can become one.

Why disclosure matters: public interest criterion 4020

Public interest criterion 4020, known as the integrity criterion, is a criterion for every partner visa. Under PIC 4020(1), there must be no evidence that the applicant has given, or caused to be given, a bogus document or information that is false or misleading in a material particular in relation to the application, or in relation to a visa the applicant held in the 12 months before the application was made.

Under PIC 4020(5), information is false or misleading in a material particular if it was false or misleading when given and is relevant to any criterion the decision maker may consider, whether or not the decision is made because of that information. The Department's policy confirms that PIC 4020 applies regardless of whether the Department found out from the applicant or from another source.

In a partner visa bankruptcy case, the risk is real. Bankruptcy is on a public register. Credit checks reveal it. Bank statements may refer to the trustee. If a form asks about debts or finances and the answer conceals the bankruptcy, the Department can find that information was false or misleading in a material particular. A refusal under PIC 4020 can also affect future applications, because the criterion includes non-grant periods for later visas.

Which questions may call for disclosure?

Partner visa forms include character and declaration questions. The Department's paper partner visa applicant form, Form 47SP, asked whether the applicant or anyone included in the application had ever "had any outstanding debts to the Australian Government or any public authority in Australia". The online application asks similar questions. Any question about debts, employment, finances, residential history or previous names must be answered accurately, and the answers must match the Form 80 personal particulars if that form is requested.

The relationship statement and the evidence should also tell the same story as the forms. If the forms disclose a bankruptcy and the statement ignores it, the decision maker will ask why.

Disclosure when circumstances change

If one partner becomes bankrupt after the application is lodged, the couple should consider whether any answer given in the application has become incorrect and whether the Department must be told. Our guide to Form 1022 change of circumstances explains when a change must be notified. A bankruptcy during processing is a common trigger for a section 56 request for more information, particularly if the couple's financial evidence suddenly changes.

Can a PIC 4020 concern be answered?

Yes. Before refusing under PIC 4020, the Department must give the applicant an opportunity to comment, usually through a section 57 natural justice letter. The response can show that the information was not false, was not material, or was a genuine error that has been corrected. PIC 4020(4) also allows the decision maker to waive PIC 4020(1) and (2) where there are compelling circumstances affecting the interests of Australia, or compassionate or compelling circumstances affecting the interests of an Australian citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen. The Australian partner's interests can therefore be directly relevant. There is no waiver for the identity requirements in PIC 4020(2A) and (2B).

The response to a natural justice letter in a partner visa bankruptcy matter must be prepared carefully. What is said in it becomes part of the record if the matter later goes to review.

How is PIC 4004 different from partner visa bankruptcy?

Public interest criterion 4004 is about debts owed to the Commonwealth, not about bankruptcy. It requires that the applicant does not have outstanding debts to the Commonwealth unless the Minister is satisfied that appropriate arrangements have been made for payment. A person can be bankrupt and owe no Commonwealth debt. A person can owe a Commonwealth debt and never have been bankrupt. In a partner visa bankruptcy matter, the two questions must be checked separately.

What counts as a debt to the Commonwealth?

The Department's procedural instruction on PIC 4004 states that a debt to the Commonwealth means any debt or amount owing to the Commonwealth, not only debts owed to the Department of Home Affairs. Debts owed to the Department can arise from removal costs, certain detention costs, costs awarded by the courts in litigation, overpayments and some customs matters. The instruction gives common examples of other Commonwealth debts, including Australian Taxation Office debts and Services Australia debts.

The same instruction states that debts owed to state governments, such as traffic fines and hospital debts, are not debts to the Commonwealth. That is a narrower category than the form question, which refers to debts to "the Australian Government or any public authority in Australia". The form question still has to be answered accurately even where a debt does not engage PIC 4004.

How is PIC 4004 satisfied?

According to the Department's procedural instruction, the decision maker can be satisfied that appropriate arrangements have been made where the debt has been paid in full or the person has entered into an approved instalment arrangement. As a matter of policy, the Department expects a debt to be paid in full before grant in most circumstances. A person who cannot pay in full must apply for an instalment plan, and the instruction states that failure to pay or to enter an acceptable arrangement will result in refusal. The instruction also states that an instalment assessment can take up to 13 weeks.

A debt that has been written off still counts, because a write-off does not extinguish the debt. A debt that has been waived by the Finance Minister no longer counts.

Does bankruptcy wipe out a Commonwealth debt?

Not always. Whether a particular Commonwealth debt was provable in the bankruptcy, and whether it was released on discharge, depends on the type of debt and is a question of bankruptcy law. In a partner visa bankruptcy case, the couple should not assume that a debt has disappeared because of the bankruptcy. The status of any Commonwealth debt should be confirmed with the relevant agency, and evidence of payment, an arrangement or release should be ready before the Department asks for it.

Tribunal decisions show that debts and disclosure often arise together. The database of partner visa remittals includes a Subclass 300 decision where the reported issues were false or misleading information, previous refused visa applications, outstanding debts to the Australian Government and waiver of the requirement, and a Subclass 309 decision where the reported issues included a claim of no outstanding liabilities and evidence of outstanding debts provided by a Chinese court. Both matters were remitted. They show that these issues can be answered, but only with careful evidence and submissions.

Can a bankrupt Australian be the sponsoring partner?

Yes. A bankrupt Australian citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen can sponsor a partner, because bankruptcy is not one of the sponsorship limitations. The limitations in regulation 1.20J concern previous sponsorships and how recently the sponsor was sponsored. In summary, a person can usually have no more than two approved partner sponsorships, cannot have another approved until at least five years after the first application, and cannot sponsor a partner until at least five years after their own partner visa application was made, subject to a waiver in compelling circumstances. Our page on partner visa sponsorship limitations and our guide on when a sponsor cannot sponsor a partner visa explain those rules.

A sponsor also gives undertakings, which include providing adequate accommodation and financial assistance as needed to meet the applicant's reasonable living needs for an initial period. A bankrupt sponsor can still give these undertakings honestly, particularly where the couple already live together and share costs, or where the applicant works. In a partner visa bankruptcy case, the sponsor should be able to explain how the household is supported. That explanation usually belongs in the relationship statement, not in a separate submission.

Sponsor issues in partner visa bankruptcy cases are usually manageable. The sponsor's bankruptcy should still be disclosed wherever the sponsorship questions call for it. The more common difficulty is the effect of the sponsor's bankruptcy on the couple's ability to be together and to share finances.

How does bankruptcy affect time together in offshore partner visa cases?

Bankruptcy can limit time together because a bankrupt Australian partner must obtain the trustee's permission before travelling overseas to visit the applicant. In a Subclass 309 or Subclass 300 case, the couple often live in different countries during processing. Visits, holidays together and time spent with each other's families are central evidence of a genuine and continuing relationship. A partner visa bankruptcy can interrupt that pattern.

What the trustee's permission means in practice

AFSA states that a bankrupt person must request permission from the trustee to leave Australia, that the trustee can place restrictions on the approval, and that leaving without permission or travelling beyond the approved destinations and dates is an offence. AFSA lists penalties that include an extension of the bankruptcy.

For a couple, this has three consequences:

• Visits must be planned earlier. Travel requests take time, and approval may come with conditions.
• Some visits may not happen. A trustee may refuse permission or approve a shorter trip.
• Every trip should be lawful. An unauthorised trip can extend the bankruptcy and may also raise questions in the visa assessment.

Proving the relationship when visits are restricted

Where the bankrupt partner cannot travel as often as the couple would like, the gap should be explained, not hidden. Useful evidence includes:

• Travel requests and approvals. Copies of applications to the trustee and the trustee's responses show that the couple tried to be together and complied with the law.
• The applicant's visits to Australia. If the applicant can lawfully visit, time spent together in Australia is strong evidence.
• Meeting in a third country. Where the trustee approves travel to a third country, time together there counts.
• Regular communication. Call logs, messages and video call records across the whole period, not only before the visa application.
• Financial support across borders. Transfers from one partner to the other, within what the bankruptcy allows, can show both commitment and the financial aspects.

Decision makers have accepted relationships where visits were limited for real reasons. The database of partner visa remittals includes Subclass 309 decisions where the reported issues were limited sharing of financial resources with evidence of regular communication, and the matters were remitted. Our guide on the Subclass 309 visa and our article on why partner visas get refused explain how time apart is usually assessed.

Common mistakes in partner visa bankruptcy matters

The most common mistakes in partner visa bankruptcy matters come from assumptions, not from the bankruptcy itself. Each one below is something couples genuinely believe.

"We cannot apply until the bankruptcy ends"

This is wrong. There is no partner visa bankruptcy rule that requires the bankruptcy to end before a partner visa application is lodged. Waiting can cause the applicant's visa to expire, can trigger a no further stay condition problem, or can leave the applicant without a substantive visa. Our articles on the 8503 no further stay condition and the Schedule 3 partner visa waiver show how quickly timing can become the real problem.

"If we do not mention the bankruptcy, the Department will not find out"

This is wrong and dangerous. In partner visa bankruptcy cases, concealment is the most serious risk. Bankruptcy is on a public register, and the Department can obtain information from many sources. Where a question calls for disclosure, concealment can lead to a refusal under PIC 4020, which is much harder to fix than a weak financial record.

"Separate bank accounts mean the relationship will be refused"

This is wrong. The Department's own policy recognises that some couples keep separate accounts and directs decision makers to look for spending on shared costs. Separate accounts are common in partner visa bankruptcy cases. The problem arises only when the couple fail to show how money is actually shared.

"Bankruptcy cleared all our debts, so PIC 4004 does not matter"

This is wrong. PIC 4004 is a separate question from partner visa bankruptcy. It asks whether a debt to the Commonwealth is outstanding. Not every debt is released by bankruptcy, and a written-off debt still counts. Each Commonwealth debt must be checked.

"The sponsor cannot sponsor while bankrupt"

This is wrong. Bankruptcy is not a sponsorship limitation under regulation 1.20J, and no partner visa bankruptcy rule stops a bankrupt sponsor. The sponsor must still meet the actual limitations and give honest undertakings.

"A lawyer can keep the bankruptcy quiet"

This is wrong. No lawyer can or should hide a bankruptcy. The proper role of a lawyer in a partner visa bankruptcy case is to make sure the bankruptcy is disclosed accurately and explained properly, and that the evidence of the relationship is complete.

"We should open a joint account just before lodging"

This is usually unwise. A bankrupt person must comply with the bankruptcy rules, and a recently opened account with few transactions carries little weight under the Department's policy. Real evidence of how the couple already share costs is more persuasive in a partner visa bankruptcy application than a new account opened for the visa.

What happens if a partner visa is refused because of thin financial evidence?

If a partner visa is refused because the decision maker was not satisfied about the financial aspects or the relationship as a whole, the refusal can usually be reviewed by the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART), which can look at all the evidence again, including new evidence. In many partner visa bankruptcy refusals, the delegate saw separate accounts, no joint assets and no explanation, and concluded the couple were financially independent. That reasoning can often be answered with evidence and context.

The ART replaced the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on 14 October 2024. Earlier Tribunal decisions remain useful guidance. Our page on partner visa refusals and ART appeals, our guide to partner visa refusal appeal options and our article on what to expect in an ART review explain the process in more detail.

The 28-day deadline cannot be extended in a partner visa bankruptcy refusal

Under section 347(3) of the Migration Act, an application for review must be made within 28 days after the day the applicant is notified of the decision, or within 7 days if the applicant is in immigration detention on the day of notification. The deadline cannot be extended. A late application is not properly made and the ART has no jurisdiction to hear it. The ART application fee must also be paid within the same 28 days, or a fee reduction request lodged with at least half of the fee paid, for the application to be properly made. The fee is substantial and increases each 1 July.

The 28 days run from the day after notification. Under section 494C, a decision sent by email is taken to be received at the end of the day it was transmitted, and a decision sent by post is taken to be received 7 working days after the date of the letter if it was posted within 3 working days. A couple who receive a refusal should check the date of notification immediately.

Who applies for review?

The person who applies depends on the visa:

• Subclass 820 and Subclass 801 refusals. The visa applicant applies, and must be physically present in Australia when the review application is made.
• Subclass 309 refusals. The visa applicant applies, while the Australian partner usually instructs, supports the review and gives evidence.
• Subclass 300 refusals. The Australian sponsor applies.
• Subclass 100 refusals. Where the applicant is outside Australia when refused, there is no ART review.

For onshore applicants, a Bridging A visa granted with the partner visa application generally ceases 35 days after the refusal if no review is lodged, but continues if review is lodged in time. Lodging review on time can therefore protect lawful status. Our guides to the Bridging A visa and bridging visas in Australia explain how this works.

How a partner visa bankruptcy refusal is answered at the ART

Answering a partner visa bankruptcy refusal is mainly a matter of evidence. The ART stands in the shoes of the original decision maker and considers the evidence available at the time of review, including evidence that was never given to the Department. In a partner visa bankruptcy refusal, the review usually involves:

• Obtaining the file. The applicant can request access to the documents the Department gave the ART under section 362A, and should do so early.
• Identifying each adverse finding. The refusal decision should be read line by line to see exactly which financial findings were made, such as no joint assets, no pooling of resources or separate finances.
• Explaining the bankruptcy. Evidence from AFSA or the trustee, together with the couple's statements, can show why joint assets and joint credit were not available.
• Rebuilding the financial evidence. Schedules of shared costs, bank statements, transfers, rent and bills can show how the couple actually share money.
• Strengthening the other aspects. Further evidence of the household, social aspects and commitment can show the relationship as a whole.
• Preparing for the hearing. Both partners should be ready to explain the bankruptcy and their financial arrangements consistently. Non-attendance at a hearing can lead to dismissal.

If the ART is satisfied, it can set aside the refusal and remit the matter to the Department with a direction that the relationship criterion is taken to be satisfied. The Department must then reassess the remaining criteria, which may include PIC 4004 and PIC 4020. That is why any Commonwealth debt or disclosure issue should be dealt with during the review, not after it.

If the ART affirms the refusal, the Minister has a personal power under section 351 to substitute a more favourable decision in the public interest. Court review on a legal error is also available in limited circumstances. These are separate processes and they are not a substitute for a well-prepared ART review.

What Tribunal decisions show about financial evidence in partner visa refusals

Tribunal decisions show that thin or unusual financial evidence is often not fatal to a partner visa, and that the Tribunal regularly sets aside refusals once the full picture is presented. The decisions below come from a database of published Tribunal decisions in which partner visa refusals were remitted to the Department. Each is described only by the issues reported for it.

• Gaspar (Migration) [2024] AATA 4055. Subclass 820. The reported issues were that the applicant was wholly reliant on the sponsor's income to meet her day-to-day needs, and that the parties saw their relationship as a long-term commitment.
• Cai (Migration) [2024] AATA 582. Subclass 309. The reported issues were a genuine spousal relationship, the financial aspects, the parties being financially independent, and the nature of the household.
• Thomas (Migration) [2023] AATA 4730. Subclass 309. The reported issues were a genuine spousal relationship, the financial aspects, a limited ability to provide one another with financial support, and the nature of the household.
• LE (Migration) [2020] AATA 5269. Subclass 309. The reported issues were a genuine and ongoing relationship, limited sharing of financial resources, evidence of regular communication and social recognition of the relationship.
• Gu (Migration) [2021] AATA 1114. Subclass 309. The reported issues were a genuine and ongoing married relationship, extensive international travel for family visits, limited sharing of financial resources and evidence of regular communication.
• 1909414 (Migration) [2024] AATA 815. Subclass 820. The reported issues included joint bank accounts, the applicant taking over financial responsibility, and housework shared according to capacity.
• 1803906 (Migration) [2021] AATA 2023. Subclass 300. The reported issues were false or misleading information, previous refused visa applications, outstanding debts to the Australian Government and waiver of the requirement.
• 1719156 (Migration) [2019] AATA 6656. Subclass 309. The reported issues were a false or misleading statement, a claim of no outstanding liabilities, evidence of outstanding debts provided by a Chinese court, and credibility issues.

None of these decisions was described as a partner visa bankruptcy case. They do not predict the result of any particular case, and each depended on its own evidence. They do show three points that matter in partner visa bankruptcy matters. Financial independence is not the end of the inquiry. One partner relying on the other can support the relationship. Debt and disclosure issues must be met directly with evidence and submissions.

How My Migration Lawyers handles partner visa bankruptcy matters

My Migration Lawyers advises couples on partner visa bankruptcy matters before lodgement, during processing and after refusal. The firm deals with complex partner visa cases, including cases where one partner is bankrupt, where debts and disclosure are in issue, and where a refusal turned on thin financial evidence. The firm acts in many partner visa matters of this exact type and is capable of handling them, including Tribunal review.

Our work on a partner visa bankruptcy matter follows clear steps:

• Timing and status check. We confirm the applicant's visa status, any conditions and any review deadline, so that the bankruptcy does not cause a delay that creates a bigger problem.
• Bankruptcy facts. We ask the couple for the key bankruptcy documents, such as the date of bankruptcy, the trustee's details, any travel approvals and any income contribution assessments, and we check what they say about the household.
• Commonwealth debt check. We identify any possible debt to the Commonwealth and advise on payment, arrangements and evidence for public interest criterion 4004, separately from the bankruptcy.
• Disclosure review. We check every relevant answer in the application, the Form 80 and any earlier applications, so that the bankruptcy and any debts are disclosed accurately and consistently and PIC 4020 is not put at risk.
• Financial evidence. We review the couple's bank statements and documents, identify shared costs, and prepare a clear schedule of how the couple share money despite separate accounts.
• Relationship statement. We review the couple's relationship statement against the evidence, identify gaps, including any unexplained gap caused by the bankruptcy, and ask the couple to correct and confirm their own account.
• Processing and natural justice. We respond to section 56 requests and section 57 natural justice letters, including any concern about financial independence or disclosure.
• Refusal and review. If a partner visa is refused on financial grounds, we advise on ART review within the 28-day deadline, obtain the file, and prepare evidence and submissions that answer each adverse finding.

The firm is led by Weiwei Zhang, Principal Lawyer. You can read more about My Migration Lawyers, see how the firm approaches partner visa lawyer work in Australia, and read when you may need an immigration lawyer for a partner visa. If your partner visa has already been refused, our pages on visa refusal appeals and visa appeal lawyers, and our guide to why Subclass 820 partner visas are refused, explain your options. Our comparison of partner visa lawyer help and doing it yourself and our guide to booking an immigration lawyer consultation explain what professional help involves, and our article on urgent immigration lawyer advice explains what to prepare if a deadline is close. If the applicant has no substantive visa, our Schedule 3 waiver page explains how that issue is handled alongside a partner visa bankruptcy. If a refused couple are considering a fresh application instead of review, our article on applying for a partner visa after a visa refusal explains the restrictions. If you lodged the application yourself, our guide to hiring an immigration lawyer after lodgement explains how a lawyer can step in, and our article on getting a second opinion explains what a review of your file involves.

My Migration Lawyers acts for couples across Australia by video consultation, including clients of our partner visa lawyers in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, the Gold Coast, Canberra, Hobart and Parramatta. The firm also acts as immigration lawyers in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, the Gold Coast, Canberra, Hobart and Parramatta. The firm's office is at Level 1, 60 Martin Place, Sydney NSW 2000.

Every partner visa bankruptcy matter is different, and no lawyer can promise an outcome. What My Migration Lawyers can do is make sure the bankruptcy is disclosed correctly, that the financial side of your relationship is shown clearly and honestly, and that you know your options and deadlines at every stage.

Book a consultation with My Migration Lawyers to have your partner visa bankruptcy situation, application or refusal reviewed. You can also call us on 1300 040 300.