Partner Visa Compelling Reasons: Waiver Evidence

A compelling reasons partner visa waiver is the legal route for a person in Australia who applied for a partner visa without holding a substantive visa. A compelling reasons partner visa case succeeds or fails on evidence, not on how strongly the couple feel about their situation.

If you are unlawful, on a Bridging Visa E, or relying on a bridging visa from another application, the Subclass 820 visa cannot be granted unless you meet the Schedule 3 criteria or the decision maker is satisfied that there are compelling reasons for not applying them. Most people in that position cannot meet Schedule 3 on its own terms. That means the compelling reasons partner visa waiver becomes the central issue in the whole application.

This guide is about evidence. It explains what compelling reasons means in law, how the Department and the Administrative Review Tribunal assess it, and then works through each category of compelling reason that applicants commonly rely on. For each category it sets out the documents that prove it and the mistakes that weaken it. It closes with the weak claims to avoid. For the general law of Schedule 3, see our guide to Schedule 3 criteria when you are unlawful and our Schedule 3 waiver page.

What are compelling reasons for a partner visa?

Compelling reasons for a partner visa are circumstances that persuade the decision maker that the Schedule 3 criteria should not be applied to an onshore partner visa applicant who did not hold a substantive visa when they applied. The phrase comes from subparagraph 820.211(2)(d)(ii) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

Where the compelling reasons requirement comes from

The onshore partner visa is lodged as a combined application for the temporary Subclass 820 visa and the permanent Subclass 801 visa. For an applicant who did not hold a substantive visa at the time of application, subparagraph 820.211(2)(d)(ii) requires the applicant to satisfy Schedule 3 criteria 3001, 3003 and 3004 "unless the Minister is satisfied that there are compelling reasons for not applying those criteria". In practice, the decision is made by a delegate of the Minister in the Department of Home Affairs, or by the Tribunal on review.

The three Schedule 3 criteria work as follows:

• Criterion 3001 requires the application to be made within a short period after the applicant last held a substantive visa. Many applicants miss this period, often because they did not know it existed.
• Criterion 3003 is a legacy criterion for people who have been unlawful since before 1 September 1994. It rarely matters today.
• Criterion 3004 applies to people who ceased to hold a substantive visa, or entered Australia unlawfully, on or after 1 September 1994. Among other things, it requires that the reasons the applicant became unlawful were beyond their control, that there are compelling reasons to grant the visa, that the applicant substantially complied with the conditions of their last visa (including any bridging visa), and that they would have been entitled to the visa if they had applied immediately before becoming unlawful.

An applicant who misses the criterion 3001 period, and who cannot meet every element of criterion 3004, needs the waiver. That is why the compelling reasons partner visa question arises in so many onshore matters. Our article on the Schedule 3 partner visa waiver explains the waiver itself in more detail.

Compelling reasons are not defined

The Migration Regulations 1994 do not define compelling reasons. The decision maker assesses them case by case. There is no checklist that, once completed, guarantees a waiver. The question is whether the applicant's circumstances, taken together and proved by evidence, are compelling enough that it would not be right to insist on the Schedule 3 criteria. That is a matter of judgement, and evidence is what moves that judgement.

Who needs a compelling reasons partner visa waiver?

A person needs a compelling reasons partner visa waiver if they were in Australia without a substantive visa when they lodged their Subclass 820 and Subclass 801 application, and they cannot satisfy Schedule 3 criteria 3001, 3003 and 3004 on their own terms. A substantive visa is any visa other than a bridging visa, a criminal justice visa or an enforcement visa.

Applicants who commonly need the waiver

The following applicants commonly need compelling reasons:

• People whose visitor, student, working holiday or other visa expired before they lodged, so they were unlawful at lodgement.
• People on a Bridging Visa E, whether because they were unlawful, were making arrangements to leave, or were waiting on a refusal review.
• People on a Bridging Visa A or Bridging Visa C attached to another application, whose substantive visa had already ended. A bridging visa is not a substantive visa, so Schedule 3 generally applies even though the person is lawful.
• People affected by section 48 of the Migration Act 1958 after a refusal or cancellation in Australia, who do not hold a substantive visa.

Our guide to bridging visas in Australia explains the differences between Bridging Visa A, B, C and E.

Schedule 3 does not make the application invalid

A common misconception is that a person who is unlawful cannot lodge a partner visa at all. That is not correct. Criterion 3001 does not make the application invalid. A person without a substantive visa can still lodge a valid onshore partner visa application. The difficulty is at the grant stage: the visa cannot be granted unless Schedule 3 is met or waived. A valid application also usually gives the applicant a bridging visa, which is why lodging correctly matters.

Other rules can still block a valid application. Condition 8503 (No Further Stay) on a visitor or other visa generally prevents a valid onshore partner application unless it is waived first, as our article on the Subclass 820 visa and condition 8503 explains. Section 48 adds extra validity requirements for applicants who have had a visa refused or cancelled since last entering Australia, as our article on a partner visa after a visa refusal explains. Those questions must be answered before any compelling reasons partner visa evidence is gathered. Where a visa has just expired or a refusal has just arrived, our guide to urgent immigration lawyer advice explains what to have ready.

How do case officers assess compelling reasons partner visa claims?

Case officers assess compelling reasons partner visa claims by considering all of the applicant's circumstances as known at the time of the decision, guided by Department policy in the Procedures Advice Manual (PAM3). The Tribunal does the same on review.

The Waensila principle: circumstances up to the decision count

In Waensila v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCAFC 32, the Full Federal Court held that the decision maker must consider all of the applicant's circumstances as known up to the time of decision. Compelling reasons are not frozen at the date of lodgement. Circumstances that arise after the application is made count. The birth of a child after lodgement is the clearest example.

This has a direct practical consequence for compelling reasons partner visa evidence. Evidence should be updated as circumstances change. A sponsor's diagnosis, a pregnancy, a bereavement, or a new caring responsibility that arises while the application is pending should be put before the decision maker with supporting documents. The Department may only learn about it if the applicant tells it.

What Department policy says

Department policy describes the waiver as intended for genuinely compelling circumstances. Policy indicates that the waiver is not meant to advantage people who failed to comply with visa conditions, manipulated their circumstances, or who can leave Australia and apply offshore. As a general rule, policy treats a genuine relationship and the hardship of separation, standing alone, as not compelling, because every partner visa applicant has a relationship.

Policy also recognises that circumstances beyond the applicant's control that caused or prolonged their unlawful status, such as severe illness or incapacity, are reasonably accepted as compelling. A long period of unlawful stay with little effort to regularise status weighs against the applicant. The best interests of any children affected by the decision are a relevant consideration.

Weighing the evidence as a whole

No single document decides a compelling reasons partner visa claim. The decision maker weighs every circumstance together. Some factors point towards a waiver, such as Australian citizen children or a sponsor's serious illness. Others point against it, such as a long unlawful stay without explanation. The evidence must make the favourable factors clear, specific and credible, and it must answer the unfavourable factors honestly rather than ignore them.

Is a genuine relationship a compelling reason for a partner visa?

No, a genuine relationship is not, by itself, a compelling reason for a partner visa waiver. Every partner visa applicant must already prove a genuine and continuing relationship under section 5F or section 5CB of the Migration Act 1958, so the relationship alone does not distinguish the applicant from anyone else.

This is the most common misconception in compelling reasons partner visa matters. Many applicants submit a long relationship statement, photographs and messages, and describe how painful separation would be. That material is essential to the genuine relationship criterion, and our guide to partner visa relationship evidence explains what the Department expects across the four aspects: the financial aspects of the relationship, the nature of the household, the social aspects of the relationship and the nature of the persons' commitment to each other. But it does not, on its own, answer the Schedule 3 question.

The hardship of separation is treated the same way. Every couple who must separate while one partner applies offshore suffers hardship. A compelling reasons partner visa claim must show something more: a circumstance that makes the couple's situation materially different from the ordinary case. The categories in the rest of this guide are the circumstances that commonly do that.

That does not mean the relationship is irrelevant. A long-standing and deeply established relationship can add weight when it sits alongside other compelling circumstances. It supports the claim. It rarely carries it.

What happens if compelling reasons are not accepted?

If compelling reasons are not accepted and the applicant cannot meet Schedule 3, the Subclass 820 visa will be refused. An onshore Subclass 820 and Subclass 801 refusal is generally a reviewable decision, and the applicant can apply to the Administrative Review Tribunal for merits review.

The deadline to apply for review is short and strictly applied. It cannot be extended, and the Tribunal has no power to accept a late application. On review, the Tribunal considers compelling reasons afresh on the evidence before it at the time of its decision, so new evidence can be given. If the Tribunal is satisfied, it can remit the application to the Department with a direction that the relevant criterion is met. Our partner visa refusals page and our article on partner visa appeal options after a refusal explain that process. Our guide to what to expect at an ART review explains the Tribunal stage.

Many of the decisions referred to in this guide were made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which the Administrative Review Tribunal replaced. In each of them the Tribunal remitted the matter to the Department for reconsideration. Park (Migration) [2020] AATA 6106 and Adhikari (Migration) [2020] AATA 4221 are further partner visa decisions in which the Tribunal remitted the matter to the Department for reconsideration. They show the kinds of circumstances that have been put forward as compelling. They do not predict the result in any other case, because every compelling reasons partner visa decision turns on its own facts.

Where our compelling reasons partner visa clients are located

My Migration Lawyers acts for compelling reasons partner visa applicants throughout Australia, and consultations are conducted by video. Couples in New South Wales can read about our partner visa lawyers in Sydney and our partner visa lawyers in Parramatta. Couples in Victoria and Queensland can read about our partner visa lawyers in Melbourne, Brisbane and the Gold Coast. We also act for couples through our partner visa lawyers in Perth, Adelaide, Canberra and Hobart. The rules on compelling reasons are the same in every state and territory. What changes from case to case is the evidence.

What makes compelling reasons partner visa evidence persuasive?

Compelling reasons partner visa evidence is persuasive when it is independent, specific, current, consistent and clearly connected to the claim it is meant to prove. The same five qualities apply to every category in the rest of this guide.

Independent

Documents from people with no interest in the outcome carry more weight than statements from the couple. A treating specialist, a school principal, a bank, a hospital or a government agency has no reason to overstate the position. The couple's own statements remain important, because they tell the story and explain the documents, but they should be supported by independent records wherever possible.

Specific

General statements are easy to make and easy to discount. A report that says the sponsor "needs support" proves little. A report that describes the sponsor's diagnosis, functional limits, daily care needs and who provides that care proves a great deal. The more precisely the evidence describes the circumstance, the more weight a compelling reasons partner visa claim can place on it.

Current

Because circumstances up to the time of decision are considered, out-of-date evidence can undermine a claim. A medical report written long before the decision may no longer reflect the sponsor's condition. Applicants should expect to update key reports and records while the application is pending, and before any Tribunal hearing.

Consistent

Every document must agree with every other document. Dates of meeting, moving in, diagnosis, visa expiry and the birth of children must match across the relationship statement, the Form 888 statements, the medical evidence and the Department's own records. Our guide to Form 888 example answers and common mistakes shows how small inconsistencies arise in supporting statements.

Connected to the claim

Evidence must be tied to the reason it is offered. A bundle of medical records with no explanation does not show why the sponsor depends on the applicant. A submission should identify each compelling reason, then point to the documents that prove it. Our partner visa document checklist explains how documents are organised for the application as a whole. In a compelling reasons partner visa matter, that organisation should also follow the compelling reasons themselves, so the decision maker can see each claim and its proof together.

Australian citizen children: compelling reasons partner visa evidence

Australian citizen children of the relationship are among the most significant compelling reasons partner visa applicants rely on, and the best interests of those children are a relevant consideration in the decision. The evidence must prove three things: that the child exists and is an Australian citizen, that the applicant is the child's parent, and what the applicant's actual role in the child's life is.

Proving the child's citizenship and parentage

The starting documents are the child's full Australian birth certificate naming both parents and, where the child is a citizen by birth because a parent is an Australian citizen or permanent resident, evidence of that parent's status. Where the child's citizenship was acquired another way, such as by descent or conferral, the citizenship certificate should be provided. An extract birth certificate that does not name the parents is not enough.

DNA evidence where paternity is questioned

Where the decision maker has reason to doubt that the applicant is the child's parent, DNA evidence may be needed. In Dinh (Migration) [2018] AATA 4513, a decision recorded with the issue of a paternity test, the Tribunal remitted the matter to the Department for reconsideration. A DNA test used for immigration purposes should be carried out by an accredited laboratory with a documented chain of custody, so that the identity of each person tested can be verified. A home test kit has little evidentiary value.

Evidence of the applicant's role in the child's life

A birth certificate proves a relationship on paper. It does not prove care. A compelling reasons partner visa claim based on children is much stronger when it shows what the applicant actually does for the child. Useful evidence includes:

• Childcare, kindergarten or school enrolment forms naming the applicant as a parent or emergency contact.
• Letters from the school, childcare centre or general practitioner confirming the applicant's involvement.
• Medicare and immunisation records showing the applicant attends appointments.
• Evidence of the applicant's care while the sponsor works, such as rosters showing the sponsor's hours.
• Form 888 statements from people who regularly see the applicant caring for the child.

Our guide to who can make a Form 888 and what it should say explains how supporting statements are prepared.

The best interests of the children

The best interests of Australian citizen children are a relevant consideration. In BIEN (Migration) [2020] AATA 2713, the recorded issue was the best interests of Australian citizen children, and the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration. Evidence about best interests should be specific to the child. It may address the child's age, health, schooling, language, attachment to each parent, and what would realistically happen to the child if the applicant had to leave Australia to apply offshore. Where a child has special needs, reports from treating professionals carry particular weight.

The decision maker will also consider whether the family could stay together by leaving Australia together. Evidence about the child's citizenship, schooling and connections in Australia, and about conditions in the applicant's home country, helps answer that question.

Is pregnancy a compelling reason for a partner visa?

Yes, pregnancy can be a compelling reason for a partner visa waiver, particularly where the pregnancy is advanced, complicated or high risk, or where the sponsor depends on the applicant for support during it. A pregnancy that arises while the application is pending counts, because circumstances up to the time of decision are considered.

In Goyal (Migration) [2020] AATA 4877, the recorded issue was the sponsor's pregnancies, and the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration. That decision illustrates that pregnancy is a circumstance the Tribunal has considered in compelling reasons partner visa matters.

The core compelling reasons partner visa evidence for pregnancy is medical. It should include a letter from the treating obstetrician, midwife or general practitioner confirming the pregnancy and the expected date of delivery, and any complications or risk factors. Where the pregnancy is high risk, the letter should explain why and what support the pregnant partner needs. Evidence of the applicant's role, such as attendance at antenatal appointments, adds weight. If the child is born before the decision, the evidence should be updated with the birth certificate and the evidence about Australian citizen children described above.

The sponsor's serious illness and dependence on the applicant

A sponsor's serious illness, together with the sponsor's dependence on the applicant for care and support, is a recognised category of compelling reasons partner visa claim. The evidence must prove both parts: the illness, and the dependence.

In Hassan (Migration) [2021] AATA 2159, the recorded issue was that the sponsor has significant illnesses, and the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration. The decision shows that a sponsor's health is a circumstance that has been put forward and considered as compelling.

What a specialist medical report should cover

A short note saying the sponsor "has a medical condition" carries little weight. A useful report comes from the treating specialist or general practitioner and addresses:

• The diagnosis, when it was made and how long the condition is expected to last.
• The current treatment, medication and appointment schedule.
• The sponsor's functional limitations in daily life, such as mobility, personal care, driving or work.
• Whether the sponsor needs care or support, and what kind.
• Who currently provides that care, and the likely effect on the sponsor if that support were removed.
• Whether the sponsor could travel or relocate overseas, and whether treatment would be available there.

The treating practitioner should state their qualifications and their treating relationship with the sponsor. A report from a practitioner who has seen the sponsor once, at the couple's request, is weaker than one from a long-term treating doctor.

Carer evidence

Dependence is proved by evidence of the care actually given. Relevant documents include any carer arrangements recognised by government agencies, care plans that name the applicant, letters from treating teams confirming the applicant attends appointments, pharmacy and appointment records, and Form 888 statements from people who see the care given. Where the sponsor receives government disability or carer support, the relevant correspondence should be included.

Mental health and compelling reasons for a partner visa

Ongoing serious mental health issues affecting the sponsor or the applicant can be compelling reasons for a partner visa waiver, provided they are proved by evidence from treating professionals and their practical effect is explained. Mental health claims are often made and often poorly documented.

In Chau (Migration) [2021] AATA 1500, the recorded issue was ongoing serious mental health issues, and the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration. That decision shows that serious mental health conditions are within the range of circumstances considered in compelling reasons partner visa cases.

The strongest compelling reasons partner visa evidence of mental health comes from a treating psychiatrist or psychologist who has seen the person over a period of time. The report should identify the diagnosis, the history and treatment, the person's current functioning, any risk factors, the role the applicant plays in the sponsor's stability or recovery, and the likely effect of separation on that person in clinical terms. A mental health care plan from a general practitioner, treatment records and medication history support it.

Two cautions apply. First, a report prepared only for the visa application, after a single consultation, is likely to be given less weight. Second, the report must be consistent with everything else on file. If the relationship statement describes an active social life and full-time work, while a report describes severe incapacity, the decision maker will notice. Consistency is part of credibility.

The applicant's own illness or incapacity as a compelling reason

Yes, the applicant's own serious illness or incapacity can be a compelling reason for a partner visa waiver, especially where it caused or prolonged the period in which the applicant was without a substantive visa. Department policy treats circumstances beyond the applicant's control that caused or prolonged unlawful status, such as severe illness or incapacity, as reasonably accepted as compelling.

This category is different from the sponsor's illness. Here the evidence explains the applicant's immigration history. It answers the question every decision maker asks: why did the applicant not apply earlier, or not leave Australia when their visa ended?

The evidence must connect the illness to the timing. Useful documents include hospital admission and discharge records, specialist reports describing the period of incapacity, treatment records showing ongoing care, and evidence of when the applicant recovered enough to deal with their visa position. A chronology matching medical dates to visa dates is often the clearest way to show the connection. If the illness began after the visa had already expired, the evidence should say so honestly and explain why it still matters.

Circumstances beyond the applicant's control

Circumstances beyond the applicant's control are a central part of many compelling reasons partner visa claims, because they explain why the applicant became, or stayed, unlawful. Criterion 3004 itself asks whether the reasons for being unlawful were beyond the applicant's control, and policy treats such circumstances as relevant to the waiver.

Wrong advice and failures by a representative

Some applicants become unlawful because they relied on incorrect advice or because a representative failed to lodge an application on time or lodged it incorrectly. This can be a relevant circumstance, but it must be proved. Useful evidence includes the engagement documents, correspondence showing what the applicant was told and when, any acknowledgement of error, and evidence of the steps the applicant took once they learned of the problem. The Form 956 and Form 956A lodged with the Department show who was appointed to act. A bare statement that "the agent made a mistake", without documents, carries little weight. Applicants who want a new representative to take over the matter can read our guide on how to change your immigration lawyer.

An earlier invalid application

An applicant may have lodged an application they believed was valid, only to learn later that it was invalid. An invalid application does not give the applicant a bridging visa, so they may have become unlawful without knowing it. The Department's correspondence confirming invalidity, the original lodgement receipt and evidence of when the applicant found out are the key documents. Our page on visa refusals explains how refusals and invalid applications differ.

Travel restrictions

Events outside anyone's control, such as border closures and international travel restrictions, can be relevant where they prevented the applicant from leaving Australia or made an offshore application impractical. In 1805730 (Migration) [2020] AATA 2957, the recorded issue was COVID-19 travel restrictions, and the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration. Evidence of the restrictions that applied to the applicant's home country, cancelled bookings and correspondence with airlines or consulates helps prove this category.

Family bereavement and family health crises

Family bereavement and serious family health issues can form part of a compelling reasons partner visa claim, particularly where they explain the applicant's immigration history or increase the sponsor's dependence on the applicant. In Verma (Migration) [2020] AATA 4542, the recorded issue was family health issues and bereavement, and the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration.

The evidence for this category should include death certificates or funeral records, medical records of the family member's illness, and evidence of how the event affected the applicant or sponsor at the time. If grief or a family crisis caused the applicant to miss a visa deadline, a chronology matching the events to the visa dates shows the connection. If the sponsor's grief has affected their health, a report from a treating practitioner should explain that effect.

A bereavement on its own, without evidence of its impact, is less persuasive. Many families experience loss. The compelling reasons partner visa evidence must show how this particular loss affects this particular couple and their circumstances now.

Financial hardship and the sponsor's financial dependence

Financial hardship can support a compelling reasons partner visa claim where the applicant's departure would cause real and demonstrable financial harm to the sponsor or the family. In Wang (Migration) [2021] AATA 4574, the recorded issues were financial hardship and the duration of the relationship, and the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration.

Financial hardship is easy to claim and hard to prove well. General statements that "life would be difficult" carry little weight. Strong evidence includes:

• Bank statements showing the household income and the applicant's contribution to it.
• Loan, mortgage and lease documents showing the couple's commitments.
• Evidence of the sponsor's own income and any limits on the sponsor's capacity to work, such as illness or caring duties.
• A household budget supported by bills and statements.
• Evidence of what an offshore application would realistically cost the household, such as the loss of the applicant's contribution while the sponsor supports two households.

Where the applicant is not permitted to work, because they hold a Bridging Visa E with condition 8101, the evidence may also show the hardship that results. A further Bridging Visa E without the no work condition may be available where the applicant can show a compelling need to work. Our guide to Subclass 820 work rights and bridging visas explains the bridging visa position.

Financial records also overlap with the financial aspects of the relationship. Our Subclass 820 evidence checklist lists the financial documents most couples already hold.

Caring for the sponsor's children or elderly parents

Caring for the sponsor's children from a previous relationship, or for the sponsor's elderly or unwell parents, can be a compelling reason for a partner visa waiver where the care is real, regular and difficult to replace. In Wang (Migration) [2018] AATA 2629, the recorded issue was that the applicant cares for the sponsor's children, and the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration.

The compelling reasons partner visa evidence for a caring role should show who is cared for, what care the applicant provides, how often, and what would happen without it. For the sponsor's children, school and childcare records naming the applicant, letters from teachers or doctors, and any parenting arrangements are useful. For elderly parents, medical evidence of the parent's needs, evidence that the applicant provides the care, and evidence that other family members cannot reasonably provide it are relevant.

Where the sponsor's children have contact arrangements with their other parent, relocation overseas may not be possible for them. Evidence of those arrangements helps explain why the family cannot simply leave Australia together.

Length and depth of the relationship: supporting evidence only

The length and depth of the relationship can support a compelling reasons partner visa claim, but they rarely carry it alone. A long-standing relationship, shared property, deep involvement in each other's families and a long period of living together all add weight to other compelling circumstances.

The duration of the relationship was recorded alongside financial hardship in Wang (Migration) [2021] AATA 4574. That pairing reflects how the factor usually works. It strengthens a claim built on other circumstances.

The evidence of relationship length is usually already on file for the genuine relationship criterion. Our guides to preparing evidence of a genuine relationship and writing the partner visa relationship statement explain how it is assembled. For the compelling reasons partner visa claim, that evidence should be referred to, not repeated in full. What matters is that the dates in the relationship statement match the dates relied on in the waiver claim.

Country conditions that make an offshore application impractical

Conditions in the applicant's home country can be relevant to a compelling reasons partner visa claim where they make it impractical or unreasonable for the applicant to leave Australia and apply for the offshore Subclass 309 visa. Department policy says the waiver is not intended for people who can leave and apply offshore, so evidence that offshore application is not realistic answers that concern directly.

Relevant evidence may include documented practical barriers to the applicant travelling to, or living in, their home country while an offshore application is processed, documented security conditions, the unavailability of essential medical treatment the applicant or a dependant needs, and the effect on Australian citizen children of relocating. The evidence should come from reliable, current and identifiable sources, and it should be tied to the applicant's own circumstances, not to general commentary.

This category must be handled carefully. A partner visa is not a protection visa, and a partner visa waiver claim is not the place to make claims about persecution or serious harm. The purpose of country evidence here is narrow: to show why an offshore partner visa application is not a realistic alternative for this family.

Weak compelling reasons partner visa claims to avoid

Weak compelling reasons partner visa claims are claims that every applicant could make, claims that are not supported by evidence, or claims that are contradicted by the applicant's own history. They are a common reason a waiver is not accepted.

The following claims are weak on their own:

• The relationship is genuine. Every applicant must prove that, so it does not distinguish the case.
• Separation would be painful. Every couple who separates experiences that hardship.
• The couple love each other and want to stay together. This is an emotional statement, not a compelling circumstance.
• The applicant likes living in Australia, works here or has friends here, without more.
• General statements about health or finances with no medical or financial documents.
• Claims of wrong advice without any documents showing the advice or the error.

Claims undermined by the applicant's own history

A compelling reasons partner visa claim is weakened where the immigration history shows deliberate non-compliance. Department policy says the waiver is not intended to advantage people who failed to comply with visa conditions or manipulated their circumstances. A long period of unlawful stay with no effort to regularise status weighs against the applicant.

The answer is not to hide the history. The Department already holds it, and false or misleading information can lead to refusal under public interest criterion 4020 and an exclusion period. The answer is to explain the history honestly, accept responsibility where it is due, and show the circumstances that make the case compelling despite it. Our article on Form 80 explains why personal history must be stated accurately.

Inconsistent dates and documents

Inconsistency is one of the quickest ways to lose credibility. The dates in the compelling reasons partner visa claim must match the dates in the relationship statement, the Form 888 statements, the medical reports and the Department's own records. A mistake in a date can look like an attempt to mislead, even when it is innocent. Every document should be checked against every other document before it is lodged.

How compelling reasons partner visa evidence is presented and updated

Compelling reasons partner visa evidence is presented as an organised written submission that sets out the immigration history, identifies each compelling reason, and refers to the evidence that proves it. The evidence is the substance. The submission shows the decision maker where to find it.

Lodging and responding to requests

The submission and evidence can be lodged with the application. The Department may also ask for more information under section 56 of the Migration Act 1958, and our guide to responding to a section 56 request explains that step. If the Department proposes to rely on adverse information, it may invite comment, and our guide to the section 57 natural justice letter explains how to respond.

Updating the evidence before the decision

Because the decision maker must consider circumstances up to the time of decision, new circumstances should be reported with evidence. A birth, a pregnancy, a diagnosis or a new caring role can change the strength of the compelling reasons partner visa claim. Changes in circumstances are notified using Form 1022. Evidence that is not before the decision maker cannot be taken into account.

The rest of the application still matters

A waiver of Schedule 3 does not grant the visa by itself. The applicant must still meet every other criterion, including the genuine relationship, health, character and sponsorship requirements. Sponsorship limitations under regulation 1.20J can apply, as our page on partner visa sponsorship limitations explains. Our complete guide to partner visas in Australia and our Subclass 820 partner visa guide cover those requirements. Our article on why Subclass 820 visas are refused explains the other common refusal grounds.

Choosing who acts on a compelling reasons partner visa matter

A compelling reasons partner visa matter is a legal matter that turns on evidence, policy and Tribunal decisions, and an applicant without a substantive visa has limited room for error. Our article on when you need an immigration lawyer for a partner visa and our guide to the partner visa lawyer vs doing it yourself question explain when professional help is worth considering. Our article on whether to use a migration agent or a lawyer for a partner visa sets out the practical differences.

Applicants who have already lodged and now realise Schedule 3 applies can read our guide to hiring an immigration lawyer after lodging your own application and our guide to getting a second opinion from an immigration lawyer. Those comparing firms can read our guide to choosing a partner visa lawyer in Australia, and, by city, choosing a partner visa lawyer in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane or Perth. For broader immigration matters, My Migration Lawyers also acts through our immigration lawyers in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide. Our guide to booking an immigration lawyer consultation explains what to prepare.

How My Migration Lawyers handles compelling reasons partner visa evidence

My Migration Lawyers deals with complex onshore partner visa matters and acts in many compelling reasons partner visa applications for people who lodged, or need to lodge, without a substantive visa. The firm is capable of handling these matters from the first assessment through to the Department decision and, where needed, review in the Administrative Review Tribunal.

The firm starts with the immigration history, because every compelling reasons partner visa claim must answer it. It then identifies which compelling reasons the evidence can actually prove, and presents the client's own account and documents in the form the law requires.

In practice, the firm's work on a compelling reasons partner visa matter includes:

• Reviewing the VEVO record, grant notices and full visa history to confirm whether Schedule 3 applies and whether section 48 or condition 8503 affects validity.
• Identifying each available category of compelling reason and testing it against the evidence the couple can realistically obtain.
• Advising on the medical, carer, school, financial and DNA evidence needed for each category, and what each report should address.
• Checking every date in the waiver claim against the relationship statement, Form 888 statements and Department records.
• Preparing the written submission that explains the immigration history honestly and links each compelling reason to its evidence.
• Updating the evidence when circumstances change before the decision, and responding to section 56 requests and natural justice letters.
• Acting on review in the Tribunal where a waiver has not been accepted, while the review deadline is still open.

The firm is led by Weiwei Zhang, Principal Lawyer. Information about the firm's waiver work is on our Schedule 3 waiver page, information about the firm's partner visa practice is on our partner visa lawyers page, and more about the firm is on our about page.

If you are in Australia without a substantive visa and need to know whether your circumstances support a compelling reasons partner visa waiver, book a consultation online or call 1300 040 300.