Partner Visa Limited Evidence

Partner visa limited evidence is one of the most common concerns couples raise before they apply, and it is not a reason in itself for refusal. Many genuine couples have thin records. Some have been together for a short time. Some live with family. Some run their lives in cash, or one partner has no income, or their culture keeps money separate. The law does not ask for a set number of documents. It asks whether the relationship is genuine and continuing, judged on all the circumstances.

This guide explains how the Department of Home Affairs assesses a partner visa limited evidence case, why quality and consistency matter more than volume, and how to explain the gaps honestly. It covers the legal test in regulations 1.15A and 1.09A of the Migration Regulations 1994, the role of the relationship statement and Form 888 statements, how evidence can be added after lodgement, how to respond to a section 56 request or a section 57 natural justice letter, and what happens if the matter reaches the Administrative Review Tribunal.

The article applies to the onshore Subclass 820 and 801 partner visa and the offshore Subclass 309 and 100 partner visa. For the full framework of partner visas, including the two stages and the sponsor's role, see the firm's complete guide to partner visas in Australia. This article is narrower. It deals with one problem: how to present a genuine relationship when the paper trail is genuinely limited.

Can you get a partner visa with limited evidence?

Yes. A partner visa can be granted where the evidence is limited, provided the decision maker is satisfied, on all the circumstances, that the couple are in a genuine and continuing relationship that meets the legal definition. There is no minimum number of documents and no mandatory checklist in the law.

That is the starting point for any partner visa limited evidence application. The Migration Act 1958 defines a married relationship in section 5F and a de facto relationship in section 5CB. The Migration Regulations then tell the decision maker what to consider. For partner visas, the decision maker must consider all the circumstances of the relationship, including four matters: the financial aspects of the relationship, the nature of the household, the social aspects of the relationship and the nature of the couple's commitment to each other.

Department policy is clear that these four matters are circumstances to be considered, not criteria that must each be satisfied. A couple with very little financial evidence can still succeed if the other aspects of the relationship, and their explanation for the gaps, are credible and consistent. The difficulty in a partner visa limited evidence case is not the law. It is persuasion. The decision maker has less material to work with, so every document, statement and answer carries more weight.

That is also why limited evidence is a common feature of refusals. The firm's article on why partner visas get refused and its guide to the most common reasons Subclass 820 visas are refused both show that thin or inconsistent evidence is often at the centre of a refusal. A refusal on that ground is usually about how the evidence was presented, not only about how much existed.

What the law says: regulations 1.15A and 1.09A

Regulation 1.15A of the Migration Regulations 1994 applies to married couples, and regulation 1.09A applies to de facto couples. Both require the decision maker, for a Subclass 820, 801, 309 or 100 visa, to consider all the circumstances of the relationship, including the same four matters.

Married couples: regulation 1.15A

Section 5F of the Migration Act provides that two people are in a married relationship if they are married under a marriage that is valid for the purposes of the Act, they have a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple to the exclusion of all others, the relationship is genuine and continuing, and they live together or do not live separately and apart on a permanent basis. Regulation 1.15A sets out how those conditions are assessed.

Under subregulation 1.15A(2), for a partner visa, the decision maker must have regard to all the circumstances of the relationship, including the matters in subregulation 1.15A(3). Department policy states that the decision maker also decides the weight to be given to each of those matters.

For a married couple with a partner visa limited evidence problem, the marriage certificate proves only that the marriage took place. It does not prove that the relationship is genuine and continuing. That must still be shown through the four aspects. The firm's article on preparing evidence of a genuine relationship explains why a valid marriage is the beginning of the case, not the end of it.

De facto couples: regulation 1.09A

Section 5CB of the Migration Act provides that two people who are not married to each other are in a de facto relationship if they have a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others, the relationship is genuine and continuing, they live together or do not live separately and apart on a permanent basis, and they are not related by family. Regulation 1.09A sets out how those conditions are assessed.

Under subregulation 1.09A(2), for a partner visa, the decision maker must consider all the circumstances of the relationship, including the four matters in subregulation 1.09A(3). Department policy on de facto relationships states that it would be an error of law to refuse a partner visa on the basis that one or more of the four matters is "not met", because the regulation requires the matters to be considered, not met.

That sentence is important for any de facto couple with a partner visa limited evidence concern. A gap in one aspect, such as finances, does not on its own defeat the application. The decision maker must weigh everything. The firm's guide to the de facto partner visa and the 12-month rule explains the extra de facto requirements that sit alongside this test.

No mandatory checklist of documents

The law does not list documents that every couple must provide. Department policy gives examples of evidence for each aspect, such as joint leases, joint bank accounts and statements from friends and family. Those are examples, not requirements.

Department policy also says the assessment must not be made by counting how many matters are satisfied against how many are not. The decision maker must consider each relationship against all the matters, take into account any other relevant information, and decide on balance whether the definition is met.

Published checklists are useful as a guide to what is possible. The firm's partner visa document checklist and its Subclass 820 evidence checklist set out the common categories. But a couple who cannot tick every box should not assume they cannot apply. A partner visa limited evidence application is built from what the couple actually have, with a clear explanation of what they do not have and why.

Why some genuine couples have limited evidence

Genuine couples have limited evidence for ordinary reasons, and the reason itself is part of the evidence. A decision maker who understands why records are thin is far more likely to accept the relationship than one who is simply left to notice the gaps.

The most common partner visa limited evidence situations are set out below. Many couples fit more than one.

New relationships

A couple who married or began living together recently will have a short paper trail. Joint accounts are new, a lease may be in one name, and there has been little time to build a shared social history. Department policy notes that bank accounts operated with reasonable frequency over a reasonable period carry more weight than recently opened accounts with few transactions. That does not make a new account worthless. It means the application should explain the timing and show how the account is being used.

For de facto couples, a new relationship also raises the 12-month requirement, which is discussed later. The firm's article asking whether you really need 12 months of de facto relationship for a Subclass 820 covers the exceptions.

Couples living with family

Many couples live with parents, siblings or extended family, often because of cost, culture or care obligations. The lease or mortgage belongs to a family member. Bills are in someone else's name. Mail may be addressed to the household rather than the couple. A partner visa limited evidence case of this kind needs evidence from the household itself: a letter or Form 888 statement from the family member who owns or rents the home, and documents that show the couple's own address at that property.

Cash-based lives

Some couples pay for most things in cash. This is common where one partner works in a cash-paid job, where the couple come from a country where banking is less used, or where one partner does not yet have an Australian bank account. Cash leaves little trace. The application should say so directly, describe how the couple share costs, and use whatever records exist, such as receipts, remittance records or a simple household budget.

One partner without income

Where one partner does not work, because they are studying, caring for children, unwell, or waiting for work rights, there is no pooling of two incomes. The firm's article on working while waiting for a Subclass 820 visa explains when work rights apply. The financial aspect is still present. It looks like support: one partner pays for the other's living costs, rent, phone, transport or study. Evidence of that support, such as transfers, a card in the dependent partner's name, or the payment of bills, can show financial interdependence even when only one person earns.

Cultural or religious reasons for separate finances

Some couples keep their money separate for cultural or religious reasons, or simply by preference. Department policy accepts this. It notes that some couples maintain separate accounts, and says that in both joint and personal accounts there should be evidence of income or spending on shared costs such as utilities, rent or mortgage. A couple with separate finances should show how shared costs are divided and paid, and explain why they organise their money this way.

Recent arrivals

A partner who has only recently arrived in Australia will have few Australian records. They may not yet have a tax file number, a Medicare card or a credit history. Overseas records may exist but be in another language or held by family. A partner visa limited evidence application for a recent arrival often relies on travel records, overseas documents with translations, and a clear timeline of how the couple came to be living together in Australia. Applicants who arrived as visitors should also read the firm's guide on moving from a tourist visa to a partner visa in Australia.

Couples who kept no records

Some couples simply did not keep anything. They deleted messages, threw away receipts and never thought they would need to prove their relationship to a government. This is more common than people expect. The answer is not to recreate documents. It is to recover what can be recovered from banks, telephone providers, employers, government agencies and social media archives, and to explain honestly what is gone.

Quality and consistency over volume

In a partner visa limited evidence case, a small number of reliable, consistent documents is worth more than a large volume of weak material. Decision makers look for evidence that is genuine, dated, connected to both partners, and consistent with what the couple say in their statements and forms.

Volume can hurt. A couple who upload hundreds of near-identical screenshots, undated photographs or documents that do not mention both partners give the decision maker more to read but nothing more to rely on. Worse, a large file increases the chance of inconsistency: a wrong date, a different address, a name spelt two ways. Each inconsistency becomes a question.

The questions a decision maker asks of each piece of evidence are simple:

• Is it genuine? Is it an official or third-party record, or something the couple created themselves?
• Is it dated? Does it show when the relationship existed, or when the couple shared a home or costs?
• Does it connect both partners? Does it name both people, or show something they share?
• Is it consistent? Does it match the relationship statement, the application form, the Form 888 statements and the other documents?

A partner visa limited evidence application should be built around those four questions. The firm's guide on how to prove a relationship is genuine explains how decision makers weigh different types of evidence, and its guide to the Subclass 820 partner visa sets out how the evidence fits into the visa criteria as a whole.

Consistency also matters across time. The same relationship will be assessed at the first stage and again at the permanent stage. What the couple say now will be compared with what they say later. A partner visa limited evidence case that is accurate from the beginning avoids problems that can surface years afterwards.

How the four aspects are assessed in a partner visa limited evidence case

In a partner visa limited evidence case, the decision maker still considers all four aspects of the relationship, but gives weight to each according to the evidence available and the couple's explanation. A weak aspect can be balanced by stronger ones. An aspect with no documents at all can still be addressed through statements and other information.

The four aspects come from subregulation 1.15A(3) for married couples and subregulation 1.09A(3) for de facto couples. Department policy describes each one in similar terms for both.

Financial aspects of the relationship

The financial aspects include joint ownership of property or major assets, joint liabilities, the extent of pooling of financial resources, whether one partner owes a legal obligation to the other, and the basis on which day-to-day household expenses are shared.

Finances are where most partner visa limited evidence problems begin. Couples without joint accounts, joint loans or joint assets often assume the financial aspect is lost. It is not. Department policy says the decision maker should consider the basis of sharing day-to-day expenses, including where each partner pays their own way. Evidence can include transfers between personal accounts, one partner paying the other's bills, nominating each other as beneficiaries of superannuation or a will, or one partner being listed on the other's insurance. The firm's guide to the Subclass 820 visa requirements and documents lists further examples.

The nature of the household

The nature of the household includes the couple's living arrangements, any joint responsibility for children, and the sharing of housework. Department policy gives examples such as joint leases, joint utilities accounts and mail addressed to both partners at the same address.

Where the lease and bills are not in the couple's names, other documents can place both partners at the same address: bank statements, driver licences, Medicare or health insurance records, enrolment records, employer records and official letters. A letter or Form 888 statement from the property owner or head tenant can confirm that the couple live there together. The relationship statement should describe how the couple run the household day to day.

Social aspects of the relationship

The social aspects include whether the couple present themselves to others as a couple, the opinion of friends and family, and joint social activities and plans. Department policy also says the decision maker should consider to what extent the laws or traditions of the applicant's home country may discourage the couple from openly admitting the relationship.

For a partner visa limited evidence application, the social aspect is often stronger than the couple expect. Declarations to government bodies, such as declaring the relationship to Services Australia or the Australian Taxation Office, count. So do invitations addressed to both partners, family events, religious ceremonies, shared memberships and messages from friends. Form 888 statements from people who know the couple are central here. Same-sex couples who could not live openly in a home country can also read the firm's page on LGBTI and same-sex partner visas.

The nature of the commitment

The nature of the commitment includes the duration of the relationship, the length of time the couple have lived together, the companionship and emotional support they give each other, and whether they see the relationship continuing long term. Department policy says this can be assessed through the partners' knowledge of each other's personal circumstances and through evidence that they intend the relationship to be long term, such as combining their affairs or naming each other in a will or superannuation.

Commitment is the aspect that depends most on the couple's own account. It is shown through the relationship statement, through knowledge of each other at any interview, and through actions: a wedding, plans to have children, decisions about where to live, or care during illness. In a partner visa limited evidence case, commitment evidence can carry real weight because it does not depend on money or property.

How to explain why evidence is limited

The explanation for limited evidence should be direct, specific and consistent with the documents. A decision maker who reads a clear account of why records are thin can assess the relationship on its merits. A decision maker who finds gaps with no explanation is left to draw their own conclusions.

A good explanation in a partner visa limited evidence application does four things:

• States the gap. It identifies what is missing, for example "we do not have a joint bank account" or "our lease is in my brother's name".
• Gives the reason. It explains why, in plain terms: "we keep our money separately because of our family's practice", "we live with my parents to save for a home", "my partner has no income while studying".
• Shows what exists instead. It points to the evidence that addresses the same aspect in another way, such as transfers, a letter from the property owner or Form 888 statements.
• Is consistent everywhere. The same explanation appears in the relationship statement, the application form and the supporting documents.

The explanation should never overstate. A couple who say they "share everything" while producing separate accounts with no shared payments create a credibility problem. It is better to describe the arrangement exactly as it is. The law accepts many ways of living as a couple. What it does not accept is an account that the documents contradict.

Where the reason for limited evidence involves a sensitive matter, such as a cultural or family objection to the relationship, a period of hardship, or a health issue, the explanation should still be given, with whatever supporting evidence exists. The firm can advise on how much detail is needed and how to present it. Its partner visa lawyers regularly advise on how to explain thin records, and its overview of partner visa lawyers in Australia describes how that work is organised.

The relationship statement in a partner visa limited evidence case

The relationship statement is evidence. In a partner visa limited evidence case, it is often the most important single document, because it is where the couple explain the history of the relationship, describe each of the four aspects, and account for the gaps in the documents.

There is one relationship statement. It sets out the history of the relationship in the couple's own words. It is not a set of separate statements for each aspect. The four aspects are matters the statement should address, because they are what the decision maker will assess.

A strong statement in a partner visa limited evidence application:

• tells the history in date order, from how the couple met to the present;
• describes how the couple share their finances, run their household, present themselves socially and plan their future;
• explains each gap in the documents and points to what exists instead;
• uses specific detail, such as places, dates, people and events, rather than general claims; and
• is consistent with every other document in the file.

The statement is the client's own evidence. Both partners review it, correct it and confirm that it is true. The role of a lawyer is to advise on what the law requires the statement to address and to make sure it is accurate and consistent with the documents. The firm's guide to the partner visa relationship statement, with examples explains the structure in more detail.

Couples sometimes assume a longer statement is stronger. Length helps only where it adds specific, verifiable detail. A statement that repeats general phrases about love and commitment adds little. A statement that explains, for example, how a couple living with family divide rent, food and household tasks, and who in the household can confirm it, gives the decision maker something to rely on.

Form 888 statements in a partner visa limited evidence application

Form 888 statements from people who know the couple are one of the most effective ways to fill gaps in a partner visa limited evidence case. They provide independent evidence of the social aspect and can also support the household and commitment aspects.

Form 888 is the Department's form for a supporting witness in a partner or prospective marriage visa application. Department policy states that supporting witness statements in this formal form should be encouraged because, as a legal document, they carry more weight. Witnesses must meet the eligibility requirements set out on Form 888 itself, and the form should be checked before it is given to a witness.

The value of a Form 888 statement lies in its detail. A witness who says only that the couple are "a genuine couple" adds little. A witness who describes how long they have known the couple, how often they see them, where the couple live, events they have attended together, and how the couple behave as a couple, provides real evidence. In a partner visa limited evidence application, the best witnesses are often the people closest to the gaps: the family member who owns the house the couple live in, the friend who saw them through a difficult period, or the community or religious leader who knows them as a married couple.

The firm's guides on who can make a Form 888 and what it should say and on Form 888 example answers and common mistakes explain how to choose witnesses and what their statements should address. Witnesses must describe what they actually know. A Form 888 statement that contains wrong dates or details the witness cannot support can damage the application rather than help it.

Alternative evidence when standard documents do not exist

Where the usual documents do not exist, other records can often address the same aspect of the relationship. A partner visa limited evidence application should look widely, because many useful records are held by third parties and can be requested.

Examples include:

• Banking records. Statements from each partner's personal accounts showing transfers between them or payments for shared costs, even where there is no joint account.
• Remittance and money transfer records. Records of money sent between partners, particularly before they lived together.
• Government records. Letters from Services Australia, the Australian Taxation Office, Medicare or a state agency showing both partners at the same address or recording the relationship.
• Employer and education records. Records showing the address of each partner, or naming the other partner as an emergency contact.
• Insurance and superannuation. Policies or nominations naming the other partner.
• Telephone and messaging records. Call logs or account records showing regular contact, presented selectively rather than in bulk.
• Travel records. Bookings, boarding passes and passport stamps showing joint travel.
• Household confirmations. Letters or Form 888 statements from landlords, property owners or family members who share the home.

Alternative evidence should still meet the four questions: genuine, dated, connected to both partners, and consistent. Documents in a language other than English need translation. Addresses on these records should also match the address history the applicant gives in the application and, where requested, in Form 80. The firm's Subclass 820 onshore partner visa explainer sets out the documents typically lodged, and a partner visa lawyer can identify which records are worth requesting in a particular case.

What a couple must never do is create documents after the event to fill a gap, or back-date anything. A joint account opened recently is fine if it is described as recent. A document that misrepresents when something happened can lead to refusal under the integrity provisions and affect future applications.

Partner visa limited evidence and the de facto 12-month requirement

For de facto couples, limited evidence often overlaps with the 12-month relationship requirement in regulation 2.03A. In most cases, a de facto relationship must have existed for at least 12 months immediately before the application is made, unless an exception applies.

Department policy identifies the exceptions: compelling and compassionate circumstances, a relationship with a person who holds or applied for a permanent humanitarian visa in the circumstances the regulation describes, and a relationship registered under a prescribed state or territory law. Policy also states that a registration made after the application but before decision satisfies the registered relationship exception.

The 12-month requirement is about the existence of the de facto relationship. A partner visa limited evidence problem for a de facto couple is therefore often two problems: proving the relationship is genuine, and proving it existed for the full period. The evidence for the earliest part of the relationship is usually the thinnest. The relationship statement should identify when the de facto relationship began and what evidence supports that date.

Registration can solve the 12-month issue where it is available, but it does not prove the relationship is genuine. The four aspects must still be addressed. Married couples are not subject to the 12-month requirement. The firm's guide to the de facto partner visa and its exceptions explains each exception in more detail.

Partner visa limited evidence when the sponsor's records are thin

The Australian sponsor's evidence matters as much as the applicant's. In some partner visa limited evidence cases, it is the sponsor whose records are thin, for example because the sponsor is a student, lives with family, or has recently returned to Australia.

The sponsor's documents should be considered as carefully as the applicant's. A sponsor who lives with parents should obtain a letter or Form 888 statement from them. A sponsor who supports the applicant financially should show the transfers. A sponsor who has recently returned from overseas should provide travel records and a timeline. The sponsor's account forms part of the relationship statement, and it must be consistent with the sponsor's own documents and with the applicant's evidence.

The firm's article on when a sponsor cannot sponsor a partner visa explains the separate sponsorship rules, which are distinct from the evidence issue but are often raised in the same consultation. Its commercial page on partner visa sponsorship limitations describes how the firm handles those matters.

Can you add evidence after lodging a partner visa?

Yes. Under section 55 of the Migration Act, an applicant may give additional information at any time before the application is decided, and the decision maker must take it into account. A partner visa limited evidence case does not need to be complete on the day of lodgement.

This matters because many partner visa limited evidence problems improve with time. A joint account opened at the time of lodgement will have months of transactions by the time the application is assessed. A lease can be changed into both names. A registration can be completed. Friends who were unavailable can provide Form 888 statements. Each of these can be uploaded through ImmiAccount while the application is pending. The firm's guide on how to create an ImmiAccount explains the system.

Evidence added after lodgement should be organised and explained. A short covering note that says what each new document is and which aspect of the relationship it supports is more useful than a series of unexplained uploads. The new evidence must also be consistent with what was already lodged.

Waiting times matter here. The firm's articles on how long a Subclass 820 takes and on the Subclass 820 onshore timeline explain why processing periods vary, and why a decision can come earlier than expected. A couple should not assume there will be a long period to fix a partner visa limited evidence problem. The application should be as strong as possible from the start, with updates added as the relationship builds.

Changes that make an answer in the application incorrect, such as a change of address, must be notified under section 104 using Form 1022. The firm's guide to Form 1022 change of circumstances explains when that applies.

Section 56 requests citing limited evidence

A section 56 request is a letter from the Department inviting the applicant to provide further information. In a partner visa limited evidence case, it often asks for more evidence of one or more aspects of the relationship, and it must be answered within the time stated in the letter.

Department policy describes section 56 as allowing an officer to seek additional relevant information before deciding an application. The officer is not required to do so and may decide the application on the information already provided. A section 56 request is therefore an opportunity. It tells the couple what the decision maker is concerned about before a decision is made.

A response to a partner visa limited evidence request should:

• address each item in the request specifically, in the order asked;
• provide the evidence that exists and explain clearly what does not exist and why;
• update the evidence to the date of the response, including anything new since lodgement; and
• remain consistent with the relationship statement and the original application.

A response that simply uploads more of the same material, without addressing what was asked, often fails to resolve the concern. The firm's guide to responding to a section 56 request for more information explains the process in detail.

Section 57 natural justice letters

A section 57 letter invites the applicant to comment on adverse information that the decision maker considers would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusing the visa. In a partner visa limited evidence case, it may set out concerns such as inconsistent addresses, a statement from a third party, or information the Department holds that contradicts the couple's account.

Department policy describes "relevant information" under subsection 57(1) as information that would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusing the visa, is specifically about the applicant or another person, and was not given by the applicant for the purpose of the application. Under subsection 57(2), the decision maker must give the applicant particulars of that information and invite comment.

A section 57 letter is more serious than a section 56 request. It usually means the decision maker is considering refusal. A partner visa limited evidence response to a section 57 letter should deal directly with each piece of adverse information, explain any inconsistency honestly, and provide evidence that answers it. Where the letter relies on a third-party allegation, the response should address it with evidence rather than general denial.

The firm's guide to the section 57 natural justice letter for a partner visa explains how to respond. Because the response period is short and the stakes are high, many couples seek urgent immigration lawyer advice as soon as the letter arrives.

Department interviews in a partner visa limited evidence case

The Department may interview the applicant, the sponsor or both. In a partner visa limited evidence case, an interview is often used to test the couple's knowledge of each other and the consistency of their accounts, because the documents alone do not settle the question.

Department policy states that the partners' knowledge of each other's personal circumstances, including background and family situation, can be relevant to the nature of the commitment and could be established at interview. Couples who are in a genuine relationship usually know each other's daily lives well. Problems arise where the answers at interview differ from the relationship statement, or where one partner does not know basic facts the other has described.

The best preparation for an interview is a relationship statement that is accurate in the first place. Both partners should reread the relationship statement and the documents lodged before any interview. They should answer from their own knowledge and say so if they do not know or do not remember something, rather than guessing.

Tribunal decisions on limited evidence

The Administrative Review Tribunal, and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal before it, has remitted a number of partner visa refusals where limited evidence was an issue. The decisions below are drawn from the issue descriptions recorded for each matter. They are not a guide to the outcome of any other case.

• Tran (Migration) [2023] AATA 3870 is a Subclass 820 matter that the Tribunal remitted. The recorded issues were a genuine and continuing relationship, a valid marriage, the four aspects, and limited evidence at the time of application.
• Carrion Manrique (Migration) [2020] AATA 1688 is a Subclass 820 matter that the Tribunal remitted. The recorded issues were limited evidence of pooling of financial resources, a limited social life, and family attendance at the couple's wedding.
• Phuong (Migration) [2019] AATA 4637 is a Subclass 820 matter that the Tribunal remitted. The recorded issues were a genuine spousal relationship, financial aspects and minimal financial integration.
• Hussain (Migration) [2022] AATA 256 is a Subclass 309 matter that the Tribunal remitted. The recorded issue was limited evidence of financial, household and social aspects while the couple lived in different countries.
• Bateman (Migration) [2019] AATA 394 is a Subclass 820 matter that the Tribunal remitted. The recorded issues were credible witnesses and the fact that the Tribunal had more information available to it than was available to the delegate.
• Jagdeep Kaur (Migration) [2021] AATA 475 is a Subclass 309 matter that the Tribunal remitted. The recorded issues were a genuine spousal relationship and significantly more evidence received from the parties.

These decisions show that a partner visa limited evidence refusal is not necessarily the end of the matter. Several of the recorded issues concern evidence that was thin before the Department and further evidence or witness evidence before the Tribunal. Each case depends on its own facts.

Partner visa refused for limited evidence: what next

If a partner visa is refused because of limited evidence, the refusal can usually be reviewed by the Administrative Review Tribunal, and the Tribunal can consider new information that was not before the Department. The time limit for applying for review is short and strictly applied, so advice should be sought immediately.

Merits review means the Tribunal reconsiders the facts and the evidence and makes the correct or preferable decision. Department policy on merits review states that, unless the legislation provides otherwise, this includes new information not available at the time of the original decision. For a partner visa limited evidence refusal, that is significant. The evidence that was missing can be gathered, the explanation can be improved, and witnesses can give evidence at the hearing.

For an onshore Subclass 820 refusal, the applicant applies for review. For an offshore Subclass 309 refusal, the Australian sponsor applies. The applicant can request a copy of the material the Department gave to the Tribunal, which shows what the decision maker relied on.

The refusal decision itself is the starting point. Department policy states that a refusal on the basis that there is no genuine relationship must address all four aspects. Reading the decision carefully shows exactly which aspects the decision maker found weak and why. A partner visa limited evidence review is built around answering those findings.

The firm's pages on partner visa refusals and on visa refusals and Tribunal review describe its review work. Its articles on partner visa refusal appeal options, what to expect at an ART review and when you need a visa appeal lawyer explain the process. Where the Tribunal affirms a refusal and there is a legal error, judicial review may be available, although it does not reconsider the facts.

Common mistakes in a partner visa limited evidence application

The most common mistakes in a partner visa limited evidence application are mistakes of presentation, not of law. They include:

• Saying nothing about the gaps. Leaving the decision maker to discover missing evidence without explanation.
• Overstating the relationship. Claiming joint finances or a shared lease that the documents do not show.
• Filling the file with volume. Uploading large numbers of undated or unconnected items in place of a few strong documents.
• Inconsistent dates and addresses. Different dates for when the relationship began, or different addresses on different documents, without explanation.
• Generic Form 888 statements. Witness statements that say little beyond the fact that the couple are together.
• Ignoring the sponsor's evidence. Focusing only on the applicant and leaving the sponsor's side thin.
• Not updating. Failing to add evidence as the relationship develops while the application is pending.
• Answering a section 56 or section 57 letter in general terms. Not addressing what was actually asked.

Many of these mistakes appear in applications prepared without advice. The firm's articles on a partner visa lawyer compared with doing it yourself and on hiring an immigration lawyer after lodging your own application explain when advice adds value. A second opinion from an immigration lawyer can identify gaps before the Department does. Couples weighing professional help can also read the firm's guide on when you need an immigration lawyer for a partner visa.

Partner visa limited evidence at the permanent stage

The relationship is assessed again at the permanent stage, when the Subclass 801 or Subclass 100 is decided, and the evidence should be stronger by then. A partner visa limited evidence case at the first stage should become a fuller case by the second.

The relationship must still be genuine and continuing when the permanent visa is decided. Couples should keep records as their life together develops: joint accounts, a lease or mortgage in both names, joint bills, family events and plans. Where the evidence at the permanent stage is still limited, the reasons should again be explained. The firm's guide to Subclass 820 compared with Subclass 801 explains the two stages.

If the relationship ends before the permanent visa is decided, different rules apply. The firm's article on what happens if the relationship breaks down and its page on family violence partner visa matters explain those provisions.

Partner visa help across Australia

Partner visa limited evidence questions arise in every state and territory, and the firm's partner visa work is national. Consultations are held by video, so a couple can obtain advice wherever they live.

The firm acts for clients in New South Wales, through its pages for partner visa lawyers in Sydney, partner visa lawyers in Parramatta and immigration lawyers in Sydney, and in Victoria through its pages for partner visa lawyers in Melbourne and immigration lawyers in Melbourne. Clients in Queensland read about partner visa lawyers in Brisbane and partner visa lawyers on the Gold Coast.

The firm also acts for clients in Western Australia, South Australia, the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania, through its pages for partner visa lawyers in Perth, partner visa lawyers in Adelaide, partner visa lawyers in Canberra and partner visa lawyers in Hobart. Couples comparing options can read the guides on how to choose a partner visa lawyer in Australia and booking an immigration lawyer consultation.

How My Migration Lawyers helps with partner visa limited evidence

My Migration Lawyers acts in many partner visa matters where the evidence is limited, including complex cases involving new relationships, couples living with family, cash-based households, one partner without income, separate finances for cultural or religious reasons, recent arrivals, and Department requests or refusals that cite limited evidence. The firm deals with complex matters of this type and is capable of handling them from the first application through to Tribunal review.

The firm's work on a partner visa limited evidence case has one aim: to present the couple's real relationship, and their own evidence, in the form the law requires.

• Identifying the gaps. The firm takes instructions on the couple's history and current life, reviews the documents they hold, and identifies which aspects of the relationship are thin and why.
• Finding the evidence that exists. The firm advises on records that can be requested from banks, government agencies, employers, landlords and family, and on the evidence that can be built while the application is pending.
• Explaining the gaps. The firm advises on how each gap should be explained, so that the explanation is clear, accurate and consistent across every document.
• Reviewing the relationship statement. The statement is the client's own evidence. The firm advises on the matters it must address, and the client reviews and corrects it so that it is true and consistent with the documents.
• Advising on Form 888 statements. The firm advises on which witnesses can speak to the aspects that are thin and what their statements should address.
• Responding to requests. Where the Department issues a section 56 request or a section 57 letter, the firm prepares a response that addresses each concern directly.
• Tribunal review. Where a refusal has been made, the firm prepares the review application, advises on and organises the further evidence, and prepares submissions and witnesses for the hearing.

The firm's partner visa practice is described on the partner visa lawyers page, and its Principal Lawyer, Weiwei Zhang, oversees that practice. More about the firm is on the about page.

If your relationship is genuine but your records are thin, or the Department has raised concerns about your evidence, book a consultation to have your partner visa limited evidence case reviewed. You can also call 1300 040 300.