Partner Visa Refused for Insufficient Evidence: What Now?

A partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision is a common type of refusal in Australian migration law, and it is often one that better evidence can address. If you have a partner visa refused insufficient evidence letter in front of you, it usually does not mean the Department decided your relationship is fake. It means the delegate was not satisfied, on the documents provided, that the legal test was met. This guide explains what a partner visa refused insufficient evidence finding really means, how to read the decision record to find each gap, why genuine couples so often under-document their relationship, and how new evidence can be put before the Administrative Review Tribunal within the 28-day deadline.

The good news is that review is a fresh look at the relationship. The difficult news is that the time limit is short and cannot be extended. If you can still act, the steps below set out what matters and in what order. For the wider picture of every refusal ground and pathway, read our guide to partner visa refusal appeal options and our overview of why partner visas get refused.

What does a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision actually mean?

A partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision means the delegate was not satisfied that the applicant is the spouse or de facto partner of the sponsor, because the evidence provided did not establish the relationship to the required standard. Under section 65 of the Migration Act 1958, a visa can only be granted if the decision maker is satisfied that the criteria are met. If the delegate is not satisfied, the visa must be refused.

The relationship test comes from two definitions. A married couple must meet the definition of spouse in section 5F. A de facto couple must meet the definition of de facto partner in section 5CB. Both definitions require a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others, a relationship that is genuine and continuing, and a couple who live together or do not live separately and apart on a permanent basis.

The phrase "insufficient evidence" rarely appears as a legal term in the decision itself. More often the decision record says the delegate "is not satisfied" that the relationship is genuine and continuing, or that "limited evidence" was provided about one or more aspects of the relationship. That language matters. It describes the delegate's state of satisfaction on the material that was before them on the day of the decision. It is not a permanent finding about your relationship.

This is why a partner visa refused insufficient evidence outcome is often different from a refusal based on fraud, a sponsor limitation or a failed health or character check. In an insufficient evidence case, the core problem is usually proof, not eligibility. Our explainer on partner visa relationship evidence and how to prove a genuine relationship sets out what the Department generally expects.

The difference between "not genuine" and "not proven"

Some decision records find positively that the relationship is not genuine, for example because of contradictions or adverse information. Others simply find that the delegate could not be satisfied either way because there was too little material. A partner visa refused insufficient evidence finding usually falls into the second group. The distinction affects strategy. Where the problem is a lack of proof, the rebuild is about filling gaps. Where the delegate found contradictions, the rebuild must also explain and resolve them, and the couple's credibility becomes central.

Which visas are affected

A partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision can be made on any partner or prospective marriage visa. It arises most often on the onshore Subclass 820 visa and its permanent stage, Subclass 801, on the offshore Subclass 309 visa and Subclass 100, and on the Subclass 300 prospective marriage visa. Our complete guide to partner visas in Australia explains how each subclass fits together, and our article on Subclass 820 versus Subclass 801 explains why the relationship is assessed again at the permanent stage.

How do you read the decision record after a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision?

You read the decision record by listing every finding the delegate made, sorting each one under the aspect of the relationship it concerns, and noting what evidence the delegate said was missing or unpersuasive. Section 66 of the Migration Act requires the refusal notice to specify the criterion that was not met and to give written reasons. Those reasons are your map.

Most partner visa decision records follow a similar order. They list the documents considered, set out the relevant law, discuss the evidence under each aspect of the relationship, and then state the conclusion. Department policy states that a refusal on the basis that the relationship test is not met must, as a minimum, address all of the matters in the relevant regulation. In practice, this means the delegate's reasoning on each aspect is written down, and each piece of reasoning points to a gap that can be addressed.

A practical method for reading the record

A careful reading of a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision record usually involves these steps:

• List the documents the delegate considered. The record normally lists what was before the delegate. Compare it with what you believe you lodged. Documents that were uploaded but not mentioned may not have been considered, or may have been given little weight.
• Highlight every "not satisfied", "limited" or "little weight" phrase. Each one is a finding you must answer.
• Sort each finding under one of the four aspects. Use the headings financial aspects, nature of the household, social aspects and nature of the commitment. Put anything else, such as timeline concerns or inconsistencies, in a separate list.
• Note what the delegate expected to see. Delegates often say what was missing, for example "no evidence of joint financial commitments" or "the applicant and sponsor have provided no evidence of cohabitation before March".
• Note any adverse information. If the delegate relied on information from another source, such as an earlier visa application, that issue needs a direct answer.
• Check the dates. Many refusals turn on a specific period, such as the 12 months before lodgement or the time since the couple moved in together.

This exercise usually turns a frightening letter into a short list of specific problems. That list becomes the evidence-gap rebuild plan discussed later in this guide. If you lodged without a lawyer, our article on hiring an immigration lawyer after lodging your own visa application explains how a lawyer can take over at the review stage, and our guide to getting a second opinion from an immigration lawyer explains what a file review involves.

What if a request for more information was missed?

Some partner visa refused insufficient evidence decisions follow a request the couple never saw or never answered. Delegates may request more information under section 56, and must put certain adverse information to the applicant for comment under section 57. If a request went to an old email address, or was answered late or only in part, the decision record will usually say so. Our guides to responding to a section 56 request for more information and to answering a section 57 natural justice letter for a partner visa explain those processes. At review, the missed material can be provided to the Tribunal.

What does the language in a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision record mean?

The language in a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision record tells you how much weight the delegate gave to each part of your evidence, and therefore where the rebuild must focus. Decision records use a fairly consistent vocabulary. Understanding it helps a couple respond to what the delegate actually found, rather than to what they fear the delegate meant.

• "I am not satisfied." This is the legal conclusion. The delegate could not reach the required state of satisfaction on the evidence provided. It does not by itself mean the delegate disbelieved the couple.
• "Limited evidence" or "little evidence." The delegate accepted that some evidence exists but found it too thin to carry the aspect. The answer is usually more evidence of the same kind over a longer period, or evidence from a different source.
• "No evidence has been provided." The delegate found nothing at all on a point. This is often the easiest gap to fill, because the couple may hold the documents but never lodged them.
• "Little weight." The delegate saw the evidence but did not find it persuasive, for example a Form 888 statement that was brief or general, or photographs without dates or context. The answer is better quality evidence, not more of the same.
• "Inconsistent" or "discrepancy." The delegate found that two pieces of evidence did not match. This must be explained directly, with supporting documents where possible.
• "Self-serving." The delegate considered that evidence created by the couple themselves, such as a relationship statement, needed independent support. The answer is evidence from third parties and institutions.

Reading these phrases carefully shows that most partner visa refused insufficient evidence decisions are not about one fatal problem. They are about several separate gaps, each of which has its own answer. A couple who understands which phrase applies to which aspect can gather the right evidence quickly, which matters because the review deadline is short.

Why the delegate's view is not the end of the matter

The delegate's findings reflect the evidence on file at one point in time. Relationships continue after lodgement. Couples move house, open joint accounts, marry, have children, care for each other through illness and attend family events. Evidence of all of these things after the delegate's decision can be put before the Tribunal. In a partner visa refused insufficient evidence review, the passage of time can itself strengthen the case, provided the review was lodged within the deadline.

What are the four aspects a delegate weighs in a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision?

The four aspects are 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. For married couples they appear in regulation 1.15A(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994. For de facto couples the same four matters appear in regulation 1.09A(3). A partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision almost always discusses all four.

These aspects are circumstances to be considered as a whole. Department policy says the assessment must not be a count of how many aspects are satisfied and how many are not. A couple with modest financial evidence can still satisfy the test if the other aspects are strong and the reasons for the financial picture are explained. This is one of the most important points in any partner visa refused insufficient evidence review.

Financial aspects of the relationship

The financial aspects cover joint ownership of property or other major assets, joint liabilities, the extent of any pooling of resources, whether one partner owes a legal obligation to the other, and how day-to-day household expenses are shared. Delegates commonly refuse where the couple has no joint account, no shared bills and no evidence of money passing between them. Our guide to preparing evidence of a genuine relationship explains the kinds of financial documents that are usually available even to couples on low incomes.

Nature of the household

The nature of the household covers living arrangements, shared responsibility for children, and the sharing of housework. Delegates look for leases, correspondence addressed to both partners at the same address, utility accounts and other proof of a shared home. A partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision often says there is "limited evidence of cohabitation", particularly where the couple lives with parents or in a share house where they are not on the lease. For de facto couples, this aspect connects with the 12-month de facto relationship requirement, which our guide to the de facto partner visa and its exceptions explains in detail.

Social aspects of the relationship

The social aspects cover whether the couple present themselves to others as a couple, the opinion of friends and family about the relationship, and whether the couple plan and undertake joint social activities. Evidence includes declarations of the relationship to government bodies and institutions, joint invitations, travel together, and supporting statements from people who know the couple. Department policy also tells delegates to consider whether the laws or traditions of the applicant's home country may discourage a couple from openly admitting the relationship. This is directly relevant for some same-sex couples, and our page on LGBTI partner visas addresses that situation.

Nature of the commitment

The nature of the commitment covers the duration of the relationship, the length of time the couple has lived together, the degree of companionship and emotional support they give each other, and whether they see the relationship continuing in the long term. Delegates often find this aspect weak where the relationship statement is short, generic or inconsistent with the documents. Our guide to the partner visa relationship statement, with examples explains how a couple sets out their own history in their own words.

Why do genuine couples end up with a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision?

Genuine couples end up with a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision because the way they actually live does not produce the documents the Department expects to see. The relationship is real, but the paper trail is thin. In many cases, the reasons are cultural, economic or practical, and they can be explained and supported at review.

The most common reasons are set out below. Each one can usually be addressed with a combination of explanation and evidence from other sources.

• A cash economy. Some couples live largely in cash, send money through informal channels, or work in jobs paid in cash. There may be no joint account and few bank records. The couple can often show the financial side of the relationship through remittance receipts, money transfer records, rent receipts, shared purchases or a clear explanation of who pays for what.
• Living with family. Many couples live with one partner's parents or relatives, especially in the early years. They are not on any lease and the bills are in a parent's name. A partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision in this situation often turns on the nature of the household. Statements from the family members they live with, mail at that address and evidence of the couple's own room or contribution to the household can help.
• Cultural reasons. In some cultures, couples do not open joint accounts, a wife may not be expected to transfer money to a husband, or a relationship is not publicly declared until marriage. These patterns can make a genuine relationship look thin on paper. Department policy accepts that home country laws and traditions can affect how openly a relationship is displayed.
• Recent cohabitation. Couples who moved in together only shortly before lodging may have few joint documents simply because there has not been time to create them. The answer is usually evidence from the period since lodgement, which the Tribunal can consider.
• Long-distance periods. Offshore couples, and couples separated by work or travel restrictions, often rely on communication records. Delegates may find this insufficient unless the record shows a sustained, meaningful relationship and visits where possible.
• A rushed or self-prepared application. Some couples lodge with only the minimum documents, believing the Department will ask for more if needed. A delegate may ask, but a couple cannot rely on being given a second chance before a decision is made.

None of these reasons is a defence on its own. A couple who lives in cash still needs to show the relationship through other evidence. What the reasons do is explain why certain documents are missing, so that the Tribunal can weigh the evidence that does exist in its proper context. Our article on the seven most common reasons Subclass 820 visas are refused shows how insufficient evidence sits alongside other refusal grounds.

A generic illustration

Consider a couple who married overseas, then lived with the husband's parents in Australia while saving for a home of their own. The wife worked casual shifts paid partly in cash. The couple kept separate bank accounts because that was the custom in both families, and they lodged a Subclass 820 application with their marriage certificate, wedding photographs and a one-page relationship statement. A delegate in that situation could well find limited evidence of the financial aspects and of the household, and refuse the visa.

In a review of that kind of partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision, the useful evidence would not be more wedding photographs. It would be statements from the parents describing the couple's life in the household, mail addressed to both partners at the family home, records of the wife's contributions to groceries or bills, an explanation of the family custom on bank accounts, evidence of the couple's savings plan for a home, and a detailed relationship statement setting out the history in the couple's own words. This illustration is generic and is not based on any client matter. It shows how the reasons for thin evidence and the answers to it fit together.

What do couples get wrong after a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision?

Couples most often get the timing and the type of evidence wrong. They spend the first weeks after the refusal gathering photographs, believing that more of the same evidence will change the result, while the 28-day review period runs. Several beliefs cause real harm in partner visa refused insufficient evidence matters.

"The Department will reconsider if we send more documents"

This is wrong. Once the visa is refused, the delegate has made the decision. Sending new documents to the Department does not reopen the application. The way to have new evidence considered on the same application is an application for review by the Administrative Review Tribunal, lodged in time. Our guide to visa refusal appeals explains how merits review works across visa types.

"More photographs will fix it"

This is wrong in most cases. Photographs show that two people were together on particular occasions. They say little about finances, the household or the long-term commitment. A partner visa refused insufficient evidence finding usually identifies gaps in aspects that photographs cannot fill. A rebuild that adds hundreds of photographs and nothing else may leave the same findings unanswered.

"We should wait until we have more evidence before applying for review"

This is wrong and dangerous. The review application must be made, and the fee paid, within 28 days after notification. Evidence can be gathered and provided to the Tribunal after the review application is lodged and before the hearing. Waiting to collect evidence first can mean losing the right to review entirely.

"The Tribunal only checks whether the delegate made a mistake"

This is wrong. The Tribunal does not simply look for errors in the delegate's reasoning. It decides the matter afresh on the evidence available at the time of its decision. This is why a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision is so often suited to review.

"Form 888 statements from anyone will do"

This is wrong. Form 888 supporting statements are given weight when they come from people who genuinely know the couple and describe what they have personally seen. Generic statements copied from the internet, or statements that contradict the couple's own account, can damage a case. Our guides to Form 888 and what it should actually say and to Form 888 example answers and common mistakes explain the difference.

Can the ART consider new evidence after a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision?

Yes. The Administrative Review Tribunal considers the evidence available at the time of review, including new evidence that was never before the delegate. Under section 54 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024, the Tribunal may exercise all the powers of the original decision maker. In practical terms, it stands in the shoes of the delegate and decides for itself whether the criteria are met.

This is the central reason why a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision is often worth reviewing. The delegate decided on a thin file. The Tribunal can decide on a complete one. The ART replaced the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on 14 October 2024, and earlier Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions remain useful examples of how the Tribunal approaches partner visa evidence. Our explainer on what to expect in an ART review after a visa refusal walks through the process from lodgement to decision.

What the Tribunal can do

On review of a partner visa refusal, section 349 of the Migration Act allows the Tribunal to affirm the decision, vary it, set it aside and substitute a new decision, or set it aside and remit the matter to the Department with a direction. In partner visa matters where the relationship is accepted, the Tribunal commonly remits the application with a direction that the relevant relationship criterion is taken to be satisfied. The Department must then reassess the remaining criteria, such as health, character and public interest criteria, and is bound by the Tribunal's finding on the relationship.

Why new evidence must be credible and consistent

New evidence is only useful if the Tribunal believes it. Evidence that appears suddenly, that is inconsistent with earlier statements, or that seems created for the review can harm the case. Public interest criterion 4020 deals with false or misleading information and bogus documents. Every document provided to the Tribunal must be genuine, and every explanation must be true. The purpose of the rebuild is to present the real relationship fully and accurately, not to create a different story.

The Department usually does not appear

The Minister is a non-participating party in migration review under section 348A, and the Department generally does not appear at the hearing. The Tribunal member asks the questions. This makes the couple's own oral evidence, and the consistency between that evidence and the documents, decisive in most partner visa refused insufficient evidence reviews.

How do you rebuild the evidence after a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision?

You rebuild the evidence by mapping every finding in the decision record to one of the four aspects, gathering evidence that answers each finding directly, explaining any gap that cannot be filled, and checking that the relationship statement, Form 888 statements and documents tell one consistent story. A partner visa refused insufficient evidence rebuild is targeted, not a pile of everything the couple owns.

The plan below follows the structure the Tribunal itself will use. It is a general framework. The right evidence depends on the facts of each relationship, and the lawyer decides how the case is put to the Tribunal.

Step 1: Financial aspects

Start with the delegate's specific financial findings. If the delegate said there was no evidence of pooled resources, gather what exists:

• Bank records. Statements showing transfers between partners, payments for shared expenses, or one partner supporting the other.
• Joint commitments. Any joint account, loan, lease, insurance policy, phone plan or car registration, including those created since lodgement.
• Nominations. Superannuation beneficiary nominations, wills or insurance beneficiary details naming the partner.
• Cash living explained. Where the couple lives largely in cash, a clear explanation in the relationship statement of how money is managed, supported by remittance receipts or purchase records where available.

Step 2: Nature of the household

Answer each household finding with evidence of the shared home:

• Address evidence. Mail, bank statements, Medicare and government correspondence at the same address for both partners.
• Living with family. Where the couple lives with relatives, Form 888 statements from those relatives describing the couple's life in the household, and evidence of contribution to rent or bills.
• Household responsibilities. A description of how housework, shopping and care of any children are shared, with supporting material where it exists.

Step 3: Social aspects

Show that the couple presents as a couple to the world:

• Declarations to institutions. Records showing the relationship declared to Centrelink, the Australian Taxation Office, employers, insurers or banks, where that has occurred.
• Joint activities. Invitations addressed to both partners, travel together, attendance at family events, and participation in community or religious activities.
• Cultural context. Where traditions limit public display of the relationship, an explanation of those traditions and how the relationship is acknowledged within the couple's community.

Step 4: Nature of the commitment

Show the depth and future of the relationship:

• Emotional support. Evidence of support through illness, bereavement, job loss or other hardship.
• Future plans. Plans for children, property, study or work that involve both partners.
• Communication during separation. For periods apart, a representative record of contact and visits, rather than thousands of screenshots.

Step 5: Relationship history

A clear chronology is often the missing piece. The couple sets out, in their own words, how they met, when the relationship became committed, when they moved in together, when they married or registered the relationship, and the major events since. Dates must match every other document. The relationship statement is the couple's own evidence. A lawyer reviews it against the documents and asks the couple to correct anything inaccurate, but the account must be theirs. Our partner visa document checklist and our 820 partner visa evidence checklist help couples see what they already hold.

Step 6: Form 888 supporting statements

Form 888 supporting statements come from people who know the couple. Strong statements describe specific occasions, how long the person has known the couple, and what they have observed about the relationship. Statements from people who live with the couple, or who have seen the relationship over years, usually carry more weight than brief statements from distant acquaintances.

Step 7: Consistency check

The final step is to compare everything. The relationship statement, the Form 888 statements, the original application, Form 80 and any earlier visa applications must be consistent on dates, addresses and relationship status. A partner visa refused insufficient evidence case can be lost at the hearing on a single unexplained contradiction, such as an earlier visa application that described the applicant as single when the couple now say they were living together. Our Form 80 guide explains how errors in personal particulars arise. Any genuine change in circumstances during review should be handled correctly, and our guide to Form 1022 change of circumstances explains when notification is needed.

What is the deadline to appeal a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision?

The deadline is 28 days after the day you are notified of the decision, under section 347(3) of the Migration Act, or 7 days if you are in immigration detention on the day of notification. The time limit cannot be extended. A late application is not properly made, and the Tribunal has no power to hear it.

The fee must also be paid within the same 28 days for the application to be properly made, or a request for a fee reduction must be lodged with at least 50% of the fee paid within that period. The review fee is substantial and increases each 1 July. Couples who have a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision should therefore plan for the fee from the first day, not after the evidence is gathered.

When the 28 days start

The 28 days run from the day after notification. Under section 494C of the Migration Act:

• Email. A decision sent by email is taken to be received at the end of the day it is transmitted.
• Post. A decision sent by post is taken to be received 7 working days after the date of the letter, if it was posted within 3 working days of that date.
• In person. A decision handed over in person is received immediately.

Because most partner visa decisions are sent by email, the clock usually starts the day after the email arrives, even if the email was not opened. Our guide to urgent immigration lawyer advice explains what to prepare when time is short.

Who applies for review

Who lodges the review application depends on the visa:

• Subclass 820 and Subclass 801. The visa applicant applies, and must be physically in Australia when the review application is made.
• Subclass 309. The visa applicant applies. The Australian partner usually gives instructions, supports the review and gives evidence.
• Subclass 300. The sponsor applies. If the couple marry after the refusal and before the review is finally decided, and notify the Tribunal, the application is also taken to be a partner visa application on remittal.
• Subclass 100. Where the Subclass 100 is refused while the person is outside Australia, there is no ART review.

Family members refused together can lodge a combined application for review with one fee. The application should include a copy of the decision notice if the applicant has it.

What happens to your bridging visa

Lodging review in time is what protects lawful status onshore. A Bridging A visa granted with a partner application lodged on or after 19 November 2016 ceases 35 days after the refusal if no review is lodged. If review is lodged in time, the bridging visa continues while the review is pending, and ceases 35 days after the Tribunal's decision, or remains in effect if the matter is remitted. The same 35-day pattern applies to Bridging B and Bridging C visas. Our guides to the Bridging A visa, the Bridging B visa, bridging visas in Australia and working while waiting on a Subclass 820 bridging visa explain the conditions that apply.

What happens at the Tribunal in a partner visa refused insufficient evidence review?

In a partner visa refused insufficient evidence review, the Tribunal reads the Department's file and the new material, invites the applicant to a hearing, takes oral evidence from the couple and often from witnesses, and then decides whether it is satisfied that the relationship test is met. The hearing is usually the decisive moment.

Before the hearing

The applicant may request access to the documents the Department gave the Tribunal under section 362A of the Migration Act. That request should be made early, because the Department's file sometimes contains material the couple has never seen, such as notes from an interview or information from an earlier visa application. New evidence and written submissions are then provided to the Tribunal before the hearing, in the form and by the date the Tribunal directs.

At the hearing

The Tribunal member usually asks each partner about how they met, the development of the relationship, the household, finances, family and plans. The partners may be questioned separately. Witnesses who gave Form 888 statements may be called. The member compares the answers with each other and with the documents. Consistent, detailed and natural evidence from both partners is often the strongest evidence in a partner visa refused insufficient evidence case.

If the applicant does not attend

Non-attendance at a scheduled hearing can lead to the review being dismissed under section 99 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024. Reinstatement must be sought within 28 days after notice of the dismissal, under section 368C of the Migration Act. Every hearing notice should be treated as a fixed commitment.

After the hearing

The Tribunal must give its decision with written reasons, and notification is given within 14 days after the decision under section 368A. If the Tribunal affirms the refusal, the Minister has a personal, non-compellable power under section 351 to substitute a more favourable decision in the public interest. A court can also review a Tribunal decision for legal error, which is a different and narrower process than merits review.

Should you reapply instead of appealing a partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision?

In most onshore cases, review is the first option to consider, because a new application raises separate legal barriers and lodging review in time is what preserves the bridging visa. Reapplying may be considered in some cases, for example where the relationship has changed significantly or where review is not available.

For an applicant in Australia, a refusal can trigger the section 48 bar, and a person without a substantive visa may face the Schedule 3 criteria if they apply again. Our guides to applying for a partner visa after a visa refusal, Schedule 3 criteria when you are unlawful, the Schedule 3 partner visa waiver and our Schedule 3 waiver service explain these barriers. The choice between appealing and reapplying is a legal decision that depends on the facts, and it should be made within the 28 days so that the review option is not lost while it is being considered.

Some situations need different advice altogether. Where the sponsor is subject to a limitation, our page on partner visa sponsorship limitations applies. Where the relationship has ended, our guide to what happens if the relationship breaks down applies. Where family violence has occurred, the family violence provisions may be relevant.

What Tribunal decisions show about partner visa refused insufficient evidence cases

Tribunal decisions show that the Tribunal regularly sets aside partner visa refusals where it has far more evidence than the delegate had. The decisions below are reported remittals: in each one, the Tribunal set aside the refusal and sent the matter back to the Department. The descriptions are limited to the reported issues in each decision.

• ZHANG (Migration) [2025] ARTA 2853. A Subclass 309 matter in which the reported issues were a genuine and continuing relationship, no documentation or submissions with the application, a valid marriage, and the financial, household and social aspects of the relationship and the nature of the commitment.
• AYIRCUM (Migration) [2024] AATA 2076. A Subclass 309 matter in which the reported issues were a genuine and continuing relationship, limited documentary evidence provided with the visa application and concerns about the purpose of the relationship, a valid marriage, and the length of the relationship.
• Koppens (Migration) [2023] AATA 904. A Subclass 820 matter in which the reported issues were a genuine and continuing relationship, a quick timeline between the start of the relationship and the application, and extensive current evidence and submissions provided to the Tribunal.
• Ku (Migration) [2019] AATA 2453. A Subclass 820 matter in which the delegate was not satisfied the parties were in a genuine and continuing relationship, the marriage was valid, further documentation provided consistent information about the relationship, and the evidence was credible.
• FERMINO DA SILVA (Migration) [2019] AATA 2472. A Subclass 820 matter in which the reported issues were insufficient evidence to demonstrate the relationship and a valid marriage, with evidence from witnesses found particularly persuasive and a finding that the couple had a mutual commitment to a shared life together.
• Bobadilla (Migration) [2022] AATA 232. A Subclass 820 matter in which the reported issues included no response to the Department's request for further information, visits to the home country and a change of contact details.
• Ashrafzada (Migration) [2021] AATA 653. A Subclass 309 matter in which the reported issues included a valid marriage and the transfer of money from the female partner not being culturally acceptable.

These decisions reflect patterns that appear throughout partner visa refused insufficient evidence reviews: a thin file before the delegate, a fuller and consistent file before the Tribunal, persuasive witness evidence, and cultural context explained rather than ignored. They are examples only. Every review turns on its own evidence, and no past decision predicts the result in another matter.

How My Migration Lawyers rebuilds partner visa cases refused for insufficient evidence

My Migration Lawyers acts for couples whose partner visa was refused because the delegate was not satisfied on the evidence, and the firm deals with complex partner visa refused insufficient evidence matters, including cases involving cash living, couples who live with family, cultural barriers to documentation, recent cohabitation, missed requests for information and inconsistencies with earlier applications. The firm acts in many partner visa refused insufficient evidence reviews of exactly this type and is equipped to handle them before the Administrative Review Tribunal.

Our work on a partner visa refused insufficient evidence matter follows clear steps:

• Deadline and status first. We confirm the date of notification, calculate the last day to lodge, confirm who must apply and whether the applicant must be in Australia, and lodge the review application and fee within the 28 days so the bridging visa is preserved.
• Decision record analysis. We read the decision record line by line and list every finding against the financial aspects, the nature of the household, the social aspects and the nature of the commitment, together with any adverse information and timeline concerns.
• Department file. We request the documents the Department gave the Tribunal, so that nothing in the file comes as a surprise at the hearing.
• Evidence-gap plan. We give the couple a targeted list of the evidence that answers each finding, and explain which gaps need a written explanation because the documents do not exist.
• Relationship statement and Form 888 statements. We review the couple's own relationship statement against the documents and the forms, identify gaps and inconsistencies, and ask the couple to correct and confirm their own account. We review Form 888 supporting statements so that they reflect what each witness has personally observed.
• Consistency and integrity check. We compare the new material with the original application, Form 80 and any earlier visa applications, so that no contradiction is left unexplained and public interest criterion 4020 is not put at risk.
• Written submissions. We prepare legal submissions that apply sections 5F or 5CB and the four aspects to the evidence, and explain the cultural, financial or practical reasons behind any gaps.
• Hearing preparation and attendance. We explain to both partners and their witnesses how the hearing works, what the member is likely to explore, and why honest, detailed answers matter. We attend the hearing.
• After the decision. If the matter is remitted, we deal with the Department on the remaining criteria. If the decision is unfavourable, we explain the options that remain.

The firm is led by Weiwei Zhang, Principal Lawyer. You can read more about My Migration Lawyers, see how the firm acts as partner visa lawyers across Australia, and read our guides on when you need a partner visa lawyer, what a visa appeal lawyer does, when you need an immigration lawyer for a partner visa, partner visa lawyer help versus doing it yourself, the factual differences between a partner visa migration agent or lawyer, and how to choose a partner visa lawyer in Australia. If you already have a representative and want to move your matter, our guide on how to change your immigration lawyer explains the process, and our guide to Form 956 and 956A explains how a representative is appointed. Our article on booking an immigration lawyer consultation explains what to bring.

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

Every partner visa refused insufficient evidence matter is different, and no lawyer can promise an outcome. What My Migration Lawyers can do is make sure the review is lodged in time, that every finding in the decision record is answered with real evidence, and that you and your partner are prepared to give clear and consistent evidence to the Tribunal. Visit our partner visa refusals page to see how the firm handles refusal reviews.

Book a consultation with My Migration Lawyers to have your partner visa refused insufficient evidence decision reviewed while there is still time to act. You can also call us on 1300 040 300.