Partner Visa After Meeting Online

Couples applying for a partner visa met online often worry that the way they met will count against them. It does not. A partner visa met online application is assessed on the same legal tests as every other partner visa: is the relationship genuine and continuing, and is there a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others?

What changes when you met online is the evidence. Your relationship may have spent months or years in messages and video calls before you were ever in the same room. Your families may not have met. You may have married quickly after meeting in person, or you may still be living in different countries. Each of those facts is lawful and common. Each also needs to be explained and proved, because a case officer reading a partner visa met online file will look for the moment the relationship became real in the physical world, and for evidence that it has continued since.

This guide explains how the Department assesses a partner visa met online application, whether you must have met in person, how to build the timeline from first message to living together, what evidence of the online phase helps and what does not, the red flags case officers look for, and what happens if the application is refused. For an overview of every partner visa subclass, see our complete guide to partner visas in Australia.

Partner visa met online: does meeting on an app matter?

No, meeting on a dating app, on social media, in a gaming community or in any other online space is not a ground for refusing a partner visa. The Migration Act 1958 and the Migration Regulations 1994 do not treat online relationships as a lesser category. Nothing in the definitions of spouse or de facto partner depends on how the couple first came into contact.

Millions of Australian couples now meet online, and the Department knows it. A partner visa met online application is not suspicious simply because the first conversation happened on a screen. What matters is what happened next. A case officer wants to see that the online contact turned into an in-person relationship, that the couple know each other well, and that they have built, or are building, a shared life.

The risk in a partner visa met online case is not the meeting. The risk is a thin or confusing file. If the evidence shows a long online phase but little proof of time spent together, or a wedding soon after a first visit with no explanation of how the couple came to that decision, the case officer is left to fill the gaps. Our guide to why partner visas get refused shows that most refusals come from evidence that does not answer the questions the Department is required to ask, rather than from the couple's story itself.

Online communities other than dating apps

Many couples did not meet on a dating app. They met in an online game, a language exchange group, a forum about a shared hobby, a faith community that moved online, or through a friend's social media post. A partner visa met online application from these couples is assessed in exactly the same way. It can help to explain the community, how long each person had been part of it, and how the friendship turned into a romantic relationship, because that context makes the early timeline easier to understand.

What the Department assesses in a partner visa met online application

The Department assesses whether the applicant is the spouse or de facto partner of the sponsor, which means a genuine and continuing relationship, a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others, and living together or not living separately and apart on a permanent basis. For a married couple these requirements come from section 5F of the Migration Act. For a de facto couple they come from section 5CB.

For the Subclass 820, Subclass 801, Subclass 309 and Subclass 100 visas, the decision maker must consider all the circumstances of the relationship, including four prescribed aspects:

• the financial aspects of the relationship;
• the nature of the household;
• the social aspects of the relationship; and
• the nature of the commitment.

For married couples these aspects appear in regulation 1.15A of the Migration Regulations. For de facto couples they appear in regulation 1.09A. Departmental policy states that it would be an error of law to refuse a partner visa on the basis that one of the four aspects is "not met", because the regulations require the aspects to be considered, not satisfied one by one. This matters for a partner visa met online application, because a couple who have only recently started living together may have limited financial or household evidence. That does not end the application. It means the other aspects, and the overall circumstances, carry more weight.

Our guide to partner visa relationship evidence explains what the Department looks for under each of the four aspects, and our Subclass 820 visa page explains how the firm prepares the onshore application.

Married couples who met online

A couple who met online and then married must show that the marriage is valid and recognised in Australia, and that the marital relationship is genuine and continuing. Departmental policy for married relationships states that no specific length of relationship is prescribed. The length of the marriage is taken into account, but alongside every other matter relevant to the nature of the commitment. A short marriage is not, by itself, a reason for refusal.

Couples who married by video link, or in a ceremony where one party was not physically present, should obtain advice before lodging. Australian law requires consent to be given in person, and a marriage solemnised overseas by proxy is recognised only in limited circumstances, such as where the law of the place of marriage allows it and both parties gave real consent. If the marriage is not recognised, the relationship is assessed as a de facto relationship instead.

De facto couples who met online

A de facto couple must generally have been in the de facto relationship for 12 months before the application, unless the relationship is registered in an Australian state or territory or compelling and compassionate circumstances apply. For a partner visa met online application, this raises an obvious question: when did the de facto relationship begin? The answer is not the date of the first message. It is the date the couple made a mutual commitment to a shared life. Our article on the de facto partner visa and the 12-month rule explains the exceptions, and our guide on whether you really need 12 months of de facto relationship answers the most common question on timing.

Same-sex couples who met online are assessed on the same terms as every other couple. Our page on the LGBTI partner visa covers issues that sometimes arise, including where the relationship could not be openly acknowledged in the applicant's home country.

Do you have to meet in person before applying for a partner visa?

It depends on the visa. For the Subclass 300 Prospective Marriage visa, yes: clause 300.214 of the Migration Regulations requires the couple to have met in person since each of them turned 18 and to be known to each other personally. For the Subclass 820 and Subclass 309 partner visas, the regulations contain no separate "met in person" criterion, but a relationship that has existed only online will rarely satisfy the definitions of spouse or de facto partner.

The Subclass 300 position

Departmental policy for the Subclass 300 visa states that written correspondence and contact by phone or the internet do not amount to having met in person. That interpretation follows the Full Federal Court's decision in Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Yucesan [2008] FCAFC 110, which held that for the parties to a proposed marriage to have "met", they must have come into each other's physical presence. The Department's paper application form for the offshore partner and prospective marriage visas asks directly whether the couple have met in person, and instructs applicants who have only met over the internet to answer "No". Our Subclass 300 visa page explains the Prospective Marriage visa.

The Subclass 820 and Subclass 309 position

For an onshore Subclass 820 partner visa or an offshore Subclass 309 visa, the test is whether the applicant is the sponsor's spouse or de facto partner. The definitions require the couple to live together, or not to live separately and apart on a permanent basis.

The Full Federal Court in SZOXP v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCAFC 69 held that a de facto relationship cannot be found not to exist solely because the couple have never lived together, or were not living together at application or at decision. Departmental policy applies the same approach to married couples: there is no timeframe within which the couple must live together. But policy is also clear that an applicant cannot meet the requirement if they have never lived with their partner and cannot satisfy the decision maker that they intend to live together in the future. The onus is on the applicant.

In practical terms, a partner visa met online application where the couple have never been in the same place is extremely difficult. It is hard to show a genuine and continuing relationship, a mutual commitment to a shared life, and a real intention to live together, when the couple have never spent a day together. Most couples who met online and are serious about a partner visa should plan for meaningful time together in person before applying.

Which visa fits a partner visa met online case?

The right visa for a partner visa met online case depends on where the applicant is, whether the couple are married, engaged or in a de facto relationship, and how much time they have spent together. There are three main pathways, and the choice should be made before any evidence is assembled.

• The onshore Subclass 820 and Subclass 801 application is lodged in Australia, usually by an applicant who is already here on another visa. The applicant must be in Australia at lodgement. The applicant's current visa, including any condition 8503, must be checked first.
• The offshore Subclass 309 and Subclass 100 application is lodged by an applicant outside Australia, who must also be outside Australia when the Subclass 309 visa is decided. Many couples who met online use this pathway because the applicant is still living in their home country.
• The Subclass 300 Prospective Marriage visa suits couples who are engaged, have met in person since both turned 18, and intend to marry in Australia within the visa period. After the marriage, the applicant applies for the onshore partner visa.

A partner visa met online application under any of these pathways is assessed on the genuineness of the relationship, but the timing and evidence differ. A couple who are engaged but have not lived together may find the Subclass 300 visa a better fit than a de facto application that cannot yet show 12 months of relationship. A couple who married overseas may lodge for the Subclass 309 visa while still living apart. Our Subclass 820 partner visa guide explains the onshore requirements in full, and our 820 visa requirements guide lists the documents needed at each stage of a partner visa met online application lodged in Australia.

Where our partner visa met online clients are located

My Migration Lawyers acts for couples who met online throughout Australia, and every consultation is conducted by video, which many of these couples find natural. 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 through our partner visa lawyers in Perth, Adelaide, Canberra and Hobart. Where the sponsor lives in Australia does not change the legal test for a partner visa met online application. The quality of the evidence does.

Building the timeline from first message to living together

The single most useful thing a couple can do in a partner visa met online application is build one clear, accurate timeline. The timeline runs from the first message, through the online courtship, to the first meeting in person, the decision to commit, and then living together or marriage. Every document in the application should sit somewhere on that timeline.

The online phase

Record the platform where you met, the date of first contact, and roughly when you moved from the app to direct messaging, calls and video calls. Note when the conversation became romantic and when you started describing yourselves as a couple. These dates do not need to be precise to the day, but they must be consistent across the relationship statement, the application forms and the evidence.

The first meeting in person

The first meeting in person is the turning point in almost every partner visa met online file. Record where and when it happened, how long you spent together, who travelled, and whether you met each other's family or friends. Keep the evidence that proves it: flight bookings, boarding passes, passport stamps, accommodation records and photographs.

The commitment

Identify when you agreed to a shared life together to the exclusion of all others. For a de facto couple this date often marks the start of the de facto relationship. For a married couple it may be an engagement before the wedding. Explain how the decision was made, and why it made sense to both of you at that time.

Living together or marriage

Record when you started living together, where, and on what basis. If you married, record the date and place and whether family attended. If there have been periods apart since, record them and the reason for each. A timeline that is honest about separations is more persuasive than one that hides them, because the case officer will usually find them in the travel records anyway.

Evidence of the online phase of the relationship

Evidence of the online phase shows that the relationship has a real history, that the couple came to know each other over time, and that the dates in the relationship statement are true. In a partner visa met online application, this evidence is helpful but it is never enough on its own. It supports the timeline. It does not replace evidence of time together in person and of a shared life.

Chat history extracts: curated, not dumped

The most common mistake in a partner visa met online application is uploading thousands of screenshots of chat messages. A case officer will not read them, and a large unsorted file can bury the important parts. The better approach is a curated extract:

• the first conversation, showing the platform and the date;
• messages that show the relationship becoming romantic;
• messages planning the first meeting in person;
• messages about the decision to commit, to marry or to live together;
• a small sample from each later period, showing that contact continued; and
• messages about practical matters, such as money, travel, family and plans.

Each extract should show the date, the names or account identifiers of both parties, and enough context to be understood. Messages in a language other than English need translations. Private or intimate content is not required and should not be included. Our guide to preparing evidence of a genuine relationship explains how to organise evidence so it can be read quickly.

Call logs and video call records

Call logs and video call records show the frequency and length of contact, which is relevant to the nature of the commitment and the emotional support the couple give each other. A summary page that states, for example, the platforms used and the typical pattern of contact, supported by sample screenshots from different periods, is more useful than a full export of every call. If the couple used several apps over time, explain when and why they changed.

Social media and photographs

Social media posts that show the couple presenting themselves as a couple to friends and family are relevant to the social aspects of the relationship. Photographs from the online phase, such as screenshots of video calls, have limited weight. Photographs of time together in person, at different times, in different places and with other people, carry much more. Departmental policy also recognises that the laws or traditions of an applicant's home country may discourage a couple from openly acknowledging their relationship, so limited public social media is not always a negative point if the reason is explained.

Translations and consistency

Where the couple communicate in more than one language, the translations should be accurate and should be prepared consistently. If the couple have a language barrier, the chat history may show how they managed it, for example by using translation tools. That evidence can be helpful, because it explains how the relationship developed despite the barrier.

Travel and visit evidence

Travel and visit evidence is often the most important evidence in a partner visa met online application, because it proves that the relationship moved from the screen into the physical world. It includes flight bookings and boarding passes, passport stamps and entry records, accommodation bookings in both names or showing two guests, receipts for shared activities, and photographs taken during each visit.

Where the couple visited each other several times, a simple table of visits, with dates, places and who travelled, makes the evidence easy to follow. The firm cross-checks that table against travel records, so that the dates in the application match the Department's own movement records. Inconsistent travel dates are one of the easiest ways to damage credibility in a partner visa met online case, and also one of the easiest to avoid.

Where the applicant came to Australia on a visitor visa to see the sponsor, the visitor visa application itself becomes part of the record. Statements about the purpose of the visit and about the relationship should be consistent with the later partner visa application. Our article on moving from a tourist visa to a partner visa in Australia explains the checks a visitor should make before applying in Australia.

Evidence once you are together in person

Once the couple are together in person, a partner visa met online application is assessed in the same way as any other application, and the evidence should cover all four aspects of the relationship. For the financial aspects, that may include joint bank accounts, shared bills, money spent on each other and arrangements for shared expenses. For the nature of the household, it includes a joint lease or mortgage, mail at the same address and how the couple share household tasks. For the social aspects, it includes joint invitations, time with each other's family and friends, and Form 888 supporting statements. For the nature of the commitment, it includes knowledge of each other's backgrounds, plans for the future, wills, superannuation nominations and the way the couple supported each other through difficult periods.

Our relationship evidence checklist for the Subclass 820 visa and our partner visa document checklist list the documents commonly provided. In a partner visa met online file, the aim is to show the progression clearly: online contact, then visits, then a shared household and shared finances.

Common mistakes in a partner visa met online application

The most common mistakes in a partner visa met online application are mistakes of presentation, not of law. They are avoidable, and each one makes the case officer's job harder.

• Uploading the entire chat history instead of a curated extract, so that the important messages are lost.
• Giving a different date of first contact or first meeting in the relationship statement, the application form and an earlier visitor visa application.
• Describing the relationship in general romantic terms without the facts a case officer needs: dates, places, visits and decisions.
• Leaving out a previous relationship, a previous sponsorship or a previous visa refusal, which the Department will find in its own records.
• Relying on photographs of video calls and screenshots of social media, with few photographs of time together in person.
• Treating money transfers as something to hide rather than something to explain.
• Lodging before the couple have spent meaningful time together, in the hope that the relationship will be accepted on the strength of the online phase.

Each of these mistakes can turn a genuine partner visa met online application into a refusal. Each can be corrected before lodgement. Where a refusal has already happened because of one of them, the review is often the place to put the evidence right, as explained below.

Long-distance periods in a partner visa met online case

Long-distance periods are normal in a partner visa met online case, and they do not prevent the grant of a partner visa if the separation is temporary and the couple remain committed. Departmental policy asks the decision maker to consider the reasons for any temporary separation and whether those reasons are consistent with a mutual commitment.

Good reasons are usually practical: work, study, family obligations, visa restrictions, or saving money for the move. The evidence should show how the couple maintained the relationship during the separation, through regular contact, visits, financial support and joint planning. A long-distance period with no contact evidence, no visits and no shared plans is harder to explain.

Couples applying offshore for the Subclass 309 visa are often still living apart when they apply. That is expected. The application should show the plan to live together in Australia and the steps already taken towards it. Our Subclass 820 vs Subclass 801 guide explains how the relationship is assessed again at the permanent stage, which is why evidence of time together should continue to be kept after lodgement.

Red flags case officers look for when couples met online

Case officers assessing a partner visa met online application are trained to look for features that sometimes appear in relationships that are not genuine. None of these features is a reason for refusal on its own. Each must be weighed with all the circumstances. But each should be identified before lodgement and addressed with honest evidence, rather than left for the case officer to interpret.

Rapid marriage soon after meeting in person

A wedding soon after the first meeting in person is one of the most common concerns in a partner visa met online application. Many couples who have spent a long time talking online feel they already know each other well when they meet. In some cultures, marriage soon after families agree is normal. The relationship statement should explain how long the couple had been in contact before meeting, how the decision to marry was made, who was consulted, and why the timing made sense to them. Evidence of family involvement and of the period of online courtship helps.

Language barriers

Where the couple do not share a first language, a case officer may ask how they communicate and how well they know each other. The answer should be specific: which language they use, how they used translation tools, whether either partner is learning the other's language, and how they discuss difficult matters. Evidence of language classes or of the way the couple communicate day to day can help.

Money transfers

Money sent by the sponsor to the applicant before they met in person can raise questions, particularly in a partner visa met online case. Financial support within a committed relationship is normal, and money transfers can be good evidence of the financial aspects. The concern arises where transfers are large, start early, are made at the applicant's request for emergencies, or are not consistent with the rest of the relationship. The application should explain what the money was for and show that the support flowed within a relationship that already existed.

Inconsistent accounts

Inconsistencies between what the applicant and sponsor say, or between the application and earlier visa applications, can be more damaging than any other issue. Dates of first contact, first meeting, engagement and moving in should be checked against each other and against the travel records before anything is lodged.

Previous sponsorships and previous relationships

A sponsor who has previously sponsored a partner, or an applicant who was previously sponsored, will have that history on the Department's records. Limits apply to how many partners a sponsor can sponsor and how close together the sponsorships can be. Our page on partner visa sponsorship limitations and our article on when a sponsor cannot sponsor a partner visa explain those rules. Previous relationships of either party should also be disclosed accurately, with evidence that they have ended.

Differences in age or circumstances

A significant age difference, or a large difference in wealth or background, is not a ground for refusal. It may simply lead the case officer to look more closely at the other evidence. The best response is the same as for every other feature in a partner visa met online application: a consistent account and strong evidence of the shared life.

The relationship statement: telling an online love story honestly

The relationship statement is the applicant's and the sponsor's own account of how the relationship began and developed, and in a partner visa met online application it is the document that ties the evidence together. There is one relationship statement. The couple write it in their own words, check every date and fact, and My Migration Lawyers presents it in the form the law requires.

A good statement in a partner visa met online case says plainly where the couple met, what drew them to each other, how often they talked, when and why they decided to meet, what happened at the first meeting, how the commitment developed, and how they live now. It addresses the questions a case officer is likely to have, such as a quick wedding, a language barrier or financial support, in the couple's own voice and without exaggeration. It does not use romantic language to fill gaps in evidence.

Our guide to the partner visa relationship statement explains its structure in detail, with examples.

Form 888 supporting statements

Form 888 supporting statements are statements by Australian citizens or permanent residents who know the couple and can describe the relationship from their own observation. In a partner visa met online case, they are particularly useful because they come from people who have seen the couple together in person. A friend who met the couple during a visit, a family member who attended the wedding, or a colleague who knows how the couple live now can each add independent weight.

The witnesses should describe what they have seen, when and where, in their own words. Our article on Form 888 for a partner visa explains who can make one and what it should say, and our guide to Form 888 example answers and common mistakes shows how to avoid generic statements that add little.

Romance scams and the sponsor's perspective

Sponsors should be aware that romance fraud exists, and that a partner visa met online application can be a target. Most couples who met online are in genuine relationships, and this section is not written to cast doubt on them. It is written because a sponsor who is asked to send large sums of money, to keep the relationship secret from family, or to commit to marriage and sponsorship before meeting in person, is entitled to pause and seek independent advice.

Warning signs from the sponsor's side include a partner who repeatedly cannot meet or video call, requests for money for emergencies, travel or visa costs before any visit has happened, pressure to marry quickly or to sign documents without reading them, and inconsistent personal details. A sponsor who has doubts should not lodge a sponsorship to test the relationship. Sponsorship is a serious legal undertaking, and a sponsorship that leads to a visa grant counts towards the limits on future sponsorships.

There are also protections for applicants. Sponsors of partner visa applicants may be asked for police checks, and the Department can disclose a sponsor's convictions for certain offences to the applicant. Where a relationship has ended because of family violence by the sponsor, special provisions may allow the applicant to continue. Our page on the family violence provisions for partner visas explains those provisions, and our article on what happens to a Subclass 820 application if the relationship breaks down explains the general position.

Interviews and requests for more information

The Department may interview the applicant, the sponsor or both, or request further information in writing, before deciding a partner visa met online application. An interview may ask how the couple met, details of the first meeting in person, each other's family, daily routines and plans for the future. The couple should answer honestly and in their own words. Rehearsed answers are easy to recognise, and a simple "I do not remember" is better than a guess that contradicts the partner's answer.

Written requests usually arrive as a section 56 request for more information, which sets a date for response. Our guide to responding to a section 56 request explains how to respond. Where the Department has information that may lead to refusal, it may invite comment through a natural justice letter, and our article on responding to a section 57 natural justice letter explains what that response should contain.

False or misleading information in a partner visa met online application has serious consequences beyond the immediate refusal. Public interest criterion 4020 allows refusal where false or misleading information has been given, and it can affect future visa applications. Every date and fact should therefore be accurate, including in the Form 80 travel and address history, and changes in circumstances during processing should be notified, generally using Form 1022.

What the Tribunal has looked at in partner visa met online cases

The Administrative Review Tribunal, and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal before it, has reviewed many refused partner visa applications where the couple met online or the relationship developed quickly. The decisions below were each set aside or remitted. They are described only by the issues the Tribunal dealt with, and each was decided on its own facts:

• Wang (Migration) [2024] ARTA 822, a Subclass 820 matter, dealt with whether the relationship was genuine and continuing where the couple validly married two months after meeting, and considered the financial, household and social aspects of the relationship, the nature of the commitment and the couple's future plans.
• Phillips (Migration) [2022] AATA 2947, a Subclass 309 matter, dealt with a genuine spousal relationship, the rapidity of the evolution of the relationship, its financial aspects and the nature of the household.
• Danquah (Migration) [2023] AATA 1378, a Subclass 309 matter, dealt with a genuine and continuing relationship, the rapid inception of the relationship, whether that was consistent with cultural beliefs, and money transfers.
• Sunarwati (Migration) [2018] AATA 2844, a Subclass 820 matter, dealt with whether the applicant was a spouse or de facto partner where the parties met online.
• May (Migration) [2018] AATA 5770, a Subclass 300 matter, dealt with whether the parties genuinely intended to marry and to live together as spouses where the relationship began through internet dating and online communication.
• White (Migration) [2018] AATA 4497, a Subclass 300 matter, dealt with whether the parties had met in person, and considered travel to the applicant's home country, airline tickets and photographic evidence.

These decisions show the same pattern. A quick marriage, an online start or money transfers were examined closely, but the outcome turned on the whole of the evidence about the relationship. They also show why travel records and photographs of time together matter so much in a partner visa met online case. Our page on partner visa refusals explains how the firm approaches a refused application.

Partner visa met online refused: the ART approach

If a partner visa met online application is refused, the refusal can usually be reviewed by the Administrative Review Tribunal, and the review is a fresh look at the merits. The Tribunal considers the evidence afresh at the time of its decision, so new evidence of the relationship, including evidence of the period since the refusal, can be provided.

The deadline to apply for review is short and strictly applied, and it runs from the date the refusal is notified. The ART cannot accept a late application. The refusal letter states the deadline, and review should be lodged within it.

An effective review in a partner visa met online case usually involves reading the refusal decision closely to identify exactly what the delegate was not satisfied about, then answering each concern with evidence: a clearer timeline, travel records, a curated chat history extract, further Form 888 supporting statements, and evidence of the shared life since the decision. The couple usually give evidence at a hearing, and the consistency of their accounts is central. Our article on what to expect in an ART review after a visa refusal, our guide to partner visa refusal appeal options and our analysis of why Subclass 820 partner visas are refused explain the process and the common issues. Our page on visa refusals and our guide to visa appeal lawyers explain the firm's review work more broadly, and our page on judicial review explains the further step available where the Tribunal makes a legal error.

Keeping evidence after you lodge a partner visa met online application

Evidence should continue to be kept after a partner visa met online application is lodged, because the relationship is assessed again at the permanent stage. For the onshore pathway, eligibility for the Subclass 801 visa is generally assessed about two years after the combined application was lodged, and the Department asks for updated evidence that the relationship is genuine and continuing at that point.

For couples who met online, the evidence at the permanent stage usually looks very different from the evidence at lodgement. The online phase becomes background. What matters now is the shared household, shared finances, the couple's social life together, and their commitment over time. Keeping joint bills, lease or mortgage documents, travel together, and new Form 888 supporting statements in good order makes the permanent stage of a partner visa met online application far simpler.

Applicants who need to travel while the application is pending should check their bridging visa first. An applicant on a Bridging Visa A generally needs a Bridging Visa B before leaving Australia. Our article on Subclass 820 processing times explains what affects how long the application takes.

Choosing who acts on a partner visa met online application

A partner visa met online application is often straightforward in law but demanding in evidence, and the way the story is presented can decide the outcome. 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, and our overview of a partner visa lawyer in Australia explains what a lawyer does on a partner visa.

Couples who have already lodged their own partner visa met online application can read our guide to hiring an immigration lawyer after lodging your own application, and those who want a fresh view of advice already received can read about getting a second opinion from an immigration lawyer. Those comparing firms can read our guides 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 have ready.

How My Migration Lawyers handles partner visa applications for couples who met online

My Migration Lawyers deals with complex partner visa matters and acts in many partner visa met online applications, including those involving a quick marriage, a long-distance relationship, a language barrier, financial support before the couple met, or a previous refusal. The firm is capable of handling these applications and approaches each one by building the evidence around the couple's real timeline, so the case officer can follow the relationship from the first message to the shared life the couple have now.

In practice, the firm's work on a partner visa met online application includes:

• Taking a detailed account of the relationship from both partners and building a single, accurate timeline from first contact to the present.
• Checking that timeline against travel records, earlier visa applications and the Department's records, which the firm obtains itself, so that every date is consistent before lodgement.
• Advising whether the relationship already meets the legal definitions, including whether enough time has been spent together in person and, for de facto couples, whether the 12-month requirement or an exception applies.
• Selecting and organising the evidence of the online phase into a curated chat history extract, call and video call summaries, and a table of visits, rather than an unsorted bundle of screenshots.
• Identifying the features a case officer is likely to raise, such as rapid marriage, money transfers, a language barrier or previous sponsorships, and addressing each with the couple's own explanation and supporting evidence.
• Reviewing the relationship statement and the Form 888 supporting statements for accuracy and consistency, and presenting the couple's own account in the form the law requires.
• Managing interviews, section 56 requests, natural justice letters and Form 1022 notifications through to the decision, and acting on Administrative Review Tribunal review if the application is refused.

The firm is led by Weiwei Zhang, Principal Lawyer. Information about the firm's partner visa practice is on our partner visa lawyers page, information about the onshore application is on our Subclass 820 visa page, and more about the firm is on our about page. Consultations are conducted by video, so couples can obtain advice wherever they are.

If you and your partner met online and want to know whether your relationship and evidence are ready for a partner visa met online application, or how to present your history to the Department, book a consultation online or call 1300 040 300.