Partner Visa Schedule 3 Criteria: Can You Still Apply Onshore?

The partner visa schedule 3 criteria decide whether a person who does not hold a substantive visa can be granted an onshore partner visa. If you are in Australia without a current visa, or you hold only a bridging visa, this article explains whether you can still apply onshore and what you must prove.

The short answer is that many people can still lodge a valid onshore application, but lodging is not the same as being granted. The partner visa schedule 3 criteria are additional criteria that apply at the time of decision. If you do not meet them, and the Department is not satisfied that there are compelling reasons not to apply them, the visa will be refused even though the relationship is genuine.

This article is written as a decision path. It sets out, in order, the questions that should be answered before anyone lodges an onshore Subclass 820 partner visa without a substantive visa. Each question builds on the one before it. The overall structure of partner visas in Australia is explained in the firm's complete guide to partner visas, and the onshore visa itself is explained in the guide to the Subclass 820 visa.

Can you still apply onshore if the partner visa schedule 3 criteria apply?

Yes, in many cases a person who does not hold a substantive visa can still make a valid onshore partner visa application, but the visa can only be granted if the partner visa schedule 3 criteria are met or waived for compelling reasons. The question "can I still apply?" therefore has two parts: can the application be made validly, and can the visa then be granted.

The first part is about validity. Some people cannot make a valid onshore application at all, for example because their last visa carried condition 8503 and no waiver has been granted, or because of limits that apply after a refusal or cancellation. An invalid application is not assessed. It gives no bridging visa and no review rights.

The second part is about grant. A valid Subclass 820 application made by a person who does not hold a substantive visa is assessed against the ordinary partner visa criteria and also against the partner visa schedule 3 criteria. Those criteria look at how long the person has been without a substantive visa, why they became unlawful, whether they complied with their earlier visa conditions and whether there are compelling reasons for granting the visa.

The practical consequence is simple. A couple can lodge a strong relationship case and still be refused because the Schedule 3 issue was not addressed. The Department's own information states that an applicant without a substantive visa must meet the additional criteria in Schedule 3 unless there are compelling reasons. That is why the questions below should be worked through in order, before the visa application charge is paid. The firm's commercial page on Schedule 3 waivers for partner visas explains how the firm acts in these matters.

Why the order of the questions matters

The order matters because an answer early in the path can make later questions irrelevant. If you hold a substantive visa today, the partner visa schedule 3 criteria do not apply to you at all. If you cannot make a valid application, there is nothing for the Department to assess against Schedule 3. If you lodged within the 28 day period and meet criterion 3001, the analysis is different from a person who has been without a visa for years. Working in order avoids paying a non-refundable charge for an application that was never going to succeed in its current form.

Question 1: Do you hold a substantive visa today?

The first question is whether you hold a substantive visa on the day the application is made, because the partner visa schedule 3 criteria apply only to applicants who do not. A substantive visa is any visa other than a bridging visa, a criminal justice visa or an enforcement visa, as defined in section 5(1) of the Migration Act 1958.

The test is applied on the date of application. It does not matter that you held a substantive visa last year, or that you expect to be granted one soon. What matters is what you hold on the day the Subclass 820 application is lodged.

What counts as a substantive visa

Most ordinary visas are substantive visas. A visitor visa, a student visa, a temporary work visa, a Working Holiday visa, a graduate visa and a skilled visa are all substantive visas while they are in effect. If you hold one of these on the day you lodge, the partner visa schedule 3 criteria are not part of your application, although other issues such as condition 8503 may still arise.

The Department's information on staying lawful explains the benefit of applying while you still hold a substantive visa. If you held a valid substantive visa when you applied, you are granted a Bridging visa A, and that bridging visa comes into effect if your current visa expires before a decision is made. This is the cleanest path, and it is why timing is so important. People who are approaching the end of a visitor visa should read the firm's guide to moving from a tourist visa to a partner visa in Australia before their visa expires.

Why a bridging visa does not count

A bridging visa is not a substantive visa, so a person who holds only a bridging visa must deal with the partner visa schedule 3 criteria. This is the point most often misunderstood. Many people believe they are lawful and therefore safe, because they hold a Bridging visa A, B, C or E. Being lawful and holding a substantive visa are different things.

The common example is a person whose earlier visa application was refused. While that application, or the review of it, is on foot, the person may hold a bridging visa and be completely lawful. If they then lodge a partner visa while holding only that bridging visa, they did not hold a substantive visa at the time of application. The partner visa schedule 3 criteria apply. The fact that the bridging visa was linked to a different application does not change this.

The different bridging visas are explained in the firm's guide to bridging visas in Australia. The rules for the Bridging visa A and the Bridging visa B are covered separately. How a bridging visa works once a partner visa has been lodged is set out in the article on working while waiting for a Subclass 820 visa.

Unlawful non-citizens and people with no visa

A person who holds no visa at all is an unlawful non-citizen. That person also does not hold a substantive visa, so the partner visa schedule 3 criteria apply. An unlawful non-citizen is in a more urgent position than a bridging visa holder, because they can be detained and removed, and because the period since their last substantive visa continues to grow every day. That period matters for criterion 3001, discussed under Question 4.

How to check your status on VEVO

The safest way to answer Question 1 is to check your current status on Visa Entitlement Verification Online, known as VEVO, rather than relying on memory or an old grant letter. VEVO shows the visa you currently hold, its grant number, its conditions and when it ceases. If VEVO shows a bridging visa, you do not hold a substantive visa. If VEVO shows no current visa, you are unlawful.

When checking, look for three things. First, the visa subclass and whether it is a bridging visa. Second, any condition 8503 or other "no further stay" condition on your last substantive visa. Third, the date your last substantive visa ceased, because that date starts the time limit in criterion 3001. Grant notices and ImmiAccount records should be kept with the VEVO result. If you do not yet have an ImmiAccount, the firm's guide on how to create an ImmiAccount explains the steps.

A careful status check is the foundation of every assessment of the partner visa schedule 3 criteria. An error at this point flows through to every later question.

Question 2: Is anything stopping a valid application at all?

The second question is whether any rule prevents a valid onshore application before the partner visa schedule 3 criteria are even considered. The two most common barriers are condition 8503 on the last substantive visa and the limits that apply to people who have had a visa refused or cancelled while not holding a substantive visa.

Validity is a threshold. If an application is not valid, it is not assessed against the partner visa schedule 3 criteria or anything else. The Department will not decide whether the relationship is genuine. The charge may be lost and the time spent preparing the application is wasted.

Condition 8503 and the waiver request

Condition 8503 is the "no further stay" condition. A person whose visa is subject to condition 8503 cannot make a valid application for most other visas while in Australia, including a Subclass 820 partner visa, unless a waiver of the condition is granted first. The Department's information states this directly.

The waiver is a separate request, decided before the partner application is lodged. It is not the same as a Schedule 3 waiver. It is assessed under its own rules, which focus on circumstances that have arisen since the visa was granted. A person who entered on a visitor visa with condition 8503 and has since formed or continued a relationship must deal with the 8503 waiver first, and then, depending on their status at the time of lodging, may also face the partner visa schedule 3 criteria.

Condition 8503 is examined in detail in the firm's article on applying for a Subclass 820 visa with a no further stay condition. The order of steps matters: lodging the partner application before the waiver is granted produces an invalid application.

Limits after a refusal or cancellation

A person who does not hold a substantive visa and who has had a visa refused or cancelled since last entering Australia may be limited in the visas they can apply for while in Australia. In many situations a partner visa is one of the visas that can still be applied for, but this depends on the facts, the type of refusal or cancellation and the person's relationship.

This is not something to assume. Before lodging, the person's full visa history since their last arrival should be checked: every application made, every refusal, every cancellation and every review. Some cancellations, particularly those connected with character, carry stricter consequences than an ordinary refusal. The firm's guides on applying for a partner visa after a visa refusal, on visa cancellations and on visa refusals explain the wider rules.

A person who is affected by these limits, and who is also outside the 28 day period, faces two separate problems. The first is whether a valid application can be made at all. The second is whether the partner visa schedule 3 criteria can be met or waived. Both must be resolved before lodging.

Other validity requirements specific to this situation

The application must also meet the ordinary validity requirements for a Subclass 820 visa. The applicant and any family members applying with them must be in Australia when the application is made. The correct visa application charge must be paid, and the Department states that it cannot process an application if the correct charge is not paid. The current charges are explained in the firm's article on the cost of a Subclass 820 partner visa.

For a person who does not hold a substantive visa, there is one further requirement that does not apply to other applicants: the statutory declarations, sponsorship form and evidence of the sponsor's status must be lodged with the application. This is dealt with under Question 7, because it is the requirement that most often makes a Schedule 3 application invalid.

A checklist for Questions 1 and 2

Before moving on to the partner visa schedule 3 criteria themselves, the following should be confirmed in writing:

• the visa you hold today, confirmed on VEVO;
• whether that visa is a substantive visa or a bridging visa;
• the date your last substantive visa ceased;
• whether your last substantive visa carried condition 8503 and, if so, whether a waiver has been granted;
• every refusal, cancellation and review since your last arrival in Australia; and
• whether the application will include the statutory declarations, sponsorship form and sponsor status evidence.

If any of these points is unclear, the application is not ready. The general requirements for the onshore application are set out in the firm's guide to 820 visa requirements, documents and how to apply, and the relationship between the two stages of the visa is explained in Subclass 820 vs Subclass 801.

Question 3: Do the partner visa schedule 3 criteria apply to you?

The partner visa schedule 3 criteria apply to you if you are a Subclass 820 applicant who did not hold a substantive visa at the time of application, unless one of the special rules applies. The source of the rule is clause 820.211(2)(d)(ii) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.

The rule in clause 820.211(2)(d)(ii)

Clause 820.211(2)(d)(ii) provides, in substance, that an applicant who is not the holder of a substantive visa must satisfy Schedule 3 criteria 3001, 3003 and 3004, unless the Minister is satisfied that there are compelling reasons for not applying those criteria. In practice the decision is made by a delegate of the Minister in the Department, and on review by the Administrative Review Tribunal.

Three points follow from the wording. First, the partner visa schedule 3 criteria are a time of application test about visa status: they are triggered by not holding a substantive visa when the application is made. Second, there are three criteria, but they do not all apply to everyone. Criterion 3001 is the time limit. Criterion 3004 applies to people who became unlawful on or after 1 September 1994, and criterion 3003 to people who have been unlawful since before that date. Third, there is a built-in way out: the decision maker can decide not to apply the criteria if there are compelling reasons.

The way the criteria fit into the rest of the onshore visa is explained in the firm's Subclass 820 partner visa guide. The relationship requirements themselves, which must be met in every case, are covered in the guide to partner visa evidence and how to prove your relationship is genuine.

Former Prospective Marriage visa holders

Former Prospective Marriage visa holders are treated differently. A person who entered Australia on a Subclass 300 Prospective Marriage visa, married their sponsor and then applies for the Subclass 820 visa is assessed under a separate set of rules. The Department's information also identifies a separate charge for former Subclass 300 holders who entered on that visa, did not apply before it expired and do not hold a substantive visa.

Whether the partner visa schedule 3 criteria apply in the same way to a former Subclass 300 holder depends on the precise facts, including when the Subclass 300 visa ceased and whether the marriage took place within its validity. This group should not assume that the general Schedule 3 analysis in this article applies to them without checking.

Diplomatic and SOFA entrants

Special rules also apply to some people who entered Australia without a visa in the ordinary sense, such as members of visiting forces under a Status of Forces Agreement and certain diplomatic or consular entrants. Their position under the partner visa schedule 3 criteria depends on how they entered and how their status ended. These are uncommon cases, and they should be assessed individually.

When the partner visa schedule 3 criteria do not apply

If you held a substantive visa on the day the application was made, the partner visa schedule 3 criteria do not apply, even if that visa expired the next day. Your Bridging visa A will keep you lawful while the application is processed. This is why lodging before a substantive visa ends is so valuable. Couples who are still in the planning stage should look at the firm's partner visa document checklist and lodge in time rather than wait for a perfect file.

Question 4: Criterion 3001 and the 28 day time limit

Criterion 3001 requires a person who does not hold a substantive visa to make the partner visa application within 28 days after the relevant day, which in most cases is the day they last held a substantive visa. It is the first of the partner visa schedule 3 criteria and the one that is easiest to measure.

The companion criterion 3002 sets a 12 month limit for some other visas. It is not the limit for partner visas. For a Subclass 820 applicant the period is 28 days.

What criterion 3001 does and does not do

Criterion 3001 does not stop a valid application being made. A person who lodges on day 40 can still make a valid application if the other validity requirements are met. What criterion 3001 does is affect grant. If the application was made outside the 28 day period and the criterion is not waived, the Schedule 2 criteria for the visa cannot be satisfied and the visa cannot be granted.

This is a common source of confusion. Some people believe that if the Department accepts the application and grants a bridging visa, the timing issue has been accepted. That is not correct. Acceptance of the application means only that it is valid. The partner visa schedule 3 criteria are assessed later, when the Department decides the application.

How the 28 days are counted

The 28 days are generally counted from the day after the applicant last held a substantive visa. The relevant day can be different in some situations covered by the regulation, so the start date should always be checked against the person's actual visa history and the full text of criterion 3001.

A simple illustration shows how it works. Suppose a visitor visa ceased at the end of a particular day and the person held no further substantive visa. The 28 day period begins on the following day. An application made within that period meets criterion 3001. An application made after it does not, and the applicant then depends on criterion 3004 or a compelling reasons waiver.

People who held a bridging visa after their substantive visa ended should take particular care. Holding a bridging visa does not stop the 28 days from running in the ordinary case, because a bridging visa is not a substantive visa. A person who has been on a bridging visa for many months after a refused application will usually be well outside the 28 day period by the time they lodge a partner visa.

Weekends and public holidays

If the last day of the 28 day period falls on a weekend or a public holiday, an application lodged on the next working day is accepted as made within time. This counting rule should be applied carefully. It extends the period only where the last day itself is not a working day.

Tribunal decisions on the 28 day period

Two Tribunal decisions illustrate how often the time limit is the central issue. In 2003271 (Migration) [2024] AATA 4140, the issue recorded was an application made more than 28 days after the last substantive visa was held. In Naiyaga (Migration) [2024] AATA 2786, the issues recorded were the Schedule 3 criteria, an application lodged outside the relevant timeframe, and waiver. Both were decisions of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, the predecessor of the Administrative Review Tribunal, and in each the matter was remitted to the Department for reconsideration.

The practical lesson is that missing the 28 day period is a common problem, but it is not always the end of the matter. Where the time limit has been missed, the case turns on whether the other partner visa schedule 3 criteria can be met or whether compelling reasons justify not applying them. That case must be built on evidence. The firm's article on Schedule 3 criteria when applying while unlawful gives further background.

Question 5: Criterion 3004 and its elements

Criterion 3004 applies to an applicant who ceased to hold a substantive visa on or after 1 September 1994, or who entered Australia unlawfully since then, and who has not since held a substantive visa. It is the part of the partner visa schedule 3 criteria that looks at why the person became unlawful and how they behaved.

In summary, criterion 3004 requires the applicant to show four things. Each is an element that must be satisfied, not a factor to be balanced.

Factors beyond your control

The applicant must show that they became unlawful, or did not hold a substantive visa, because of factors beyond their control. This looks at the cause of the gap in status, not at the relationship. A deliberate decision to stay after a visa ended is unlikely to satisfy this element. A sudden event that genuinely prevented the person from applying for a further visa may be different.

Evidence matters. If the reason was a hospital admission, the records of the admission are needed. If the reason was a mistake by a third party, the documents showing the mistake are needed. A statement in the applicant's own words is useful, but on its own it is rarely enough.

Compelling reasons for granting the visa

The applicant must show that there are compelling reasons for granting the visa. This element overlaps with, but is not identical to, the separate power not to apply the partner visa schedule 3 criteria at all, which is discussed under Question 6. Both require reasons that are compelling, which means forceful and persuasive, not merely sympathetic.

Substantial compliance with visa conditions

The applicant must show that they substantially complied with the conditions of their last substantive visa. A person who breached work limits on a student visa, or who stopped studying, may have difficulty with this element. Substantial compliance does not require perfection, but it does require that the conditions were, in substance, respected.

Would have been entitled to the visa

The applicant must show that they would have been entitled to the visa if they had applied before becoming unlawful. In a partner visa case this usually means that the relationship and the other criteria would have been met at that earlier time. A relationship that began only after the person became unlawful can make this element harder.

Criterion 3003 for people unlawful before 1 September 1994

Criterion 3003 is the companion criterion for people who have been unlawful since before 1 September 1994. It is now rarely relevant, but it remains one of the partner visa schedule 3 criteria listed in clause 820.211(2)(d)(ii).

Why criterion 3004 is often difficult

Criterion 3004 is demanding because every element must be met. A person may have a strong explanation for becoming unlawful but a poor compliance history, or a good compliance history but no evidence of why they could not apply in time. Where the elements cannot all be met, the applicant's case depends on the decision maker being satisfied that there are compelling reasons not to apply the partner visa schedule 3 criteria at all. The firm's guide on the Schedule 3 partner visa waiver discusses the waiver in more depth.

Question 6: Could compelling reasons justify not applying the partner visa schedule 3 criteria?

Yes, the partner visa schedule 3 criteria do not have to be met if the decision maker is satisfied that there are compelling reasons for not applying them, but policy sets a high bar and the reasons must be proved with evidence. This is the question on which most onshore Schedule 3 partner cases are decided.

All circumstances up to the time of decision

Compelling reasons are assessed on all the circumstances up to the time of the decision, not only the circumstances at the time the application was made. Department policy refers to the Full Federal Court decision in Waensila v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCAFC 32 for this principle.

This has two practical effects. First, events after lodgement count. The birth of a child, a serious illness or a change in the sponsor's health can be relevant even if it happened long after the application was made. Second, the evidence must be kept up to date. A compelling reasons case prepared at lodgement and never updated may not reflect the circumstances when the decision is finally made. The Department's own information recommends updating relationship documents regularly through ImmiAccount, and changes should be notified using Form 1022.

What policy says is usually not enough on its own

As a general rule, Department policy states that the existence of a genuine relationship is not, by itself, a compelling reason for not applying the partner visa schedule 3 criteria. The hardship of separation, if the applicant had to leave Australia and apply from outside, is also not, by itself, a compelling reason.

This is the point most often missed. Many applications rely entirely on how long the couple have been together and how hard separation would be. Policy treats those matters as the ordinary consequences of the law, which every couple in this position faces. Policy gives an example of a weak case: a person who has been unlawful for years, has made little effort to become lawful and relies only on a long relationship and the hardship of separation.

The waiver is also not meant to advantage people who failed to comply with visa conditions, who deliberately manipulated their circumstances, or who are able to leave and apply from outside Australia. A submission that ignores these points is unlikely to persuade.

What policy accepts

Policy states that it is reasonable to accept compelling reasons where circumstances beyond the applicant's control led to them becoming unlawful or prevented them from becoming lawful again. Severe illness or incapacity is given as an example.

Beyond that, every case turns on its own facts and evidence. The decision maker looks at the whole picture. A relationship is still relevant: it is not enough on its own, but it forms part of the circumstances. Other matters may add weight, for example where the circumstances of the sponsor or of children make departure from Australia genuinely unreasonable, rather than merely difficult. Where family violence is part of the history, the separate protections described on the firm's family violence partner visa page may also be relevant.

Tribunal decisions on compelling reasons

Two Tribunal decisions show how compelling reasons are argued in practice. In Ali (Migration) [2026] ARTA 640, the issues recorded were compelling reasons to waive the Schedule 3 criteria, children of the relationship and DNA testing. In Fu (Migration) [2025] ARTA 669, the issues recorded were compelling reasons to waive Schedule 3 and the absence of a substantive visa at the time of application. In each decision the matter was remitted to the Department for reconsideration.

The lesson from these decisions is not that a particular fact decides the outcome. It is that the Tribunal considers the actual circumstances, supported by evidence, when deciding whether to waive the partner visa schedule 3 criteria. In Ali, the recorded reference to DNA testing shows the kind of objective evidence that can support a claim about children of the relationship.

Building the compelling reasons case from your own evidence

A compelling reasons case under the partner visa schedule 3 criteria is built from the applicant's own circumstances and evidence. It is never built from a template. The submission should explain, in order, how and why the applicant came to be without a substantive visa, what they did to try to regularise their status, what has changed since, and why the circumstances, taken together, are compelling.

Each claim in the submission should point to evidence: medical records, letters from treating practitioners, birth certificates, school records, care arrangements, financial records and the relationship evidence itself. The relationship statement is the couple's own account of the relationship. It is not the place to argue Schedule 3, but it should be consistent with the submission. The general approach to collecting evidence is set out in the article on preparing evidence of a genuine relationship and in the 820 partner visa evidence checklist.

Honesty is essential. The account of how the applicant became unlawful must be accurate and consistent with the Department's records, including earlier applications and Form 80 answers. An explanation that is contradicted by the file can damage the whole application, not only the Schedule 3 argument.

Question 7: What must the application contain to be valid without a substantive visa?

An onshore partner visa application made by a person who does not hold a substantive visa must include the sponsorship form, evidence of the sponsor's status and at least two statutory declarations confirming the relationship, or it may be invalid. This requirement sits alongside the partner visa schedule 3 criteria and must be satisfied at the moment of lodgement.

Two statutory declarations made within six weeks

The Department's information requires a minimum of two statutory declarations, each made within the last six weeks by an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident or an eligible New Zealand citizen, confirming the relationship. Three details in that requirement cause most of the problems.

The first is timing. Each declaration must have been made within the six weeks before the application is lodged. Declarations signed months earlier, while the couple were still deciding whether to apply, will not meet the requirement. The second is the status of the person making the declaration. A friend who holds a temporary visa cannot make one of the required declarations, however well they know the couple. The third is content. Each declaration must confirm the relationship, so it should identify the couple, explain how the person knows them and state what they have observed.

Why Form 888 is not enough

Form 888 is not a statutory declaration. The Department states this expressly, and it states that if the required information is not included when the application is lodged, the application may be deemed invalid. Form 888 statements remain useful supporting witness evidence in every partner visa application, and they are explained in the firm's articles on who can make a Form 888 and what it should say and on Form 888 example answers and common mistakes. For an applicant without a substantive visa, however, Form 888 statements do not replace the required statutory declarations.

This is one of the most damaging errors in practice. A couple may prepare an otherwise complete application, lodge two Form 888 statements and assume the requirement is met. If the application is invalid, it is not assessed against the partner visa schedule 3 criteria at all, and the applicant may be left without a bridging visa.

Sponsorship form and evidence of sponsor status

The sponsorship form and evidence of the sponsor's status as an Australian citizen, Australian permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen must also be included at the time of application. For most applicants the sponsorship can follow the application. For an applicant without a substantive visa, it cannot. If the sponsor is subject to a sponsorship limitation, that must also be considered before lodging, as explained on the firm's page on partner visa sponsorship limitations.

The rest of the application

The rest of the application should be prepared to the same standard as any other partner visa: the relationship evidence across the financial aspects, the nature of the household, the social aspects and the nature of the commitment, the relationship statement, identity documents, Form 80 where required, and the submission addressing the partner visa schedule 3 criteria. Where a representative is acting, the appointment is made on Form 956.

Partner visa schedule 3 criteria in practice: three illustrative scenarios

The following scenarios are generic illustrations, not real cases. They show how the decision path works for three common situations under the partner visa schedule 3 criteria.

Scenario 1: a visa expired a few days ago

A person's student visa ceased last week. They have been in a relationship with an Australian citizen for some time and did not apply before the visa ended. They now hold no visa. Question 1: they do not hold a substantive visa, so the partner visa schedule 3 criteria apply. Question 2: their student visa did not carry condition 8503, and they have no refusal or cancellation since arrival. Question 4: they are still within the 28 day period. If they lodge a valid application with the statutory declarations, sponsorship form and sponsor status evidence within that period, criterion 3001 is met, and the application should then address criterion 3004 with evidence. This person should act immediately. Each day of delay reduces the margin.

Scenario 2: a bridging visa after a refused application

A person applied for a skilled visa while they held a student visa. The skilled visa was refused, the student visa ended, and they held a Bridging visa A during the review. They now want to lodge a partner visa. Question 1: they hold only a bridging visa, so the partner visa schedule 3 criteria apply. Question 2: they have had a visa refused since last arriving and do not hold a substantive visa, so their ability to make a valid application must be checked. Question 4: their last substantive visa ended long ago, so they are likely to be well outside the 28 day period. Their case will depend on criterion 3004 or on compelling reasons, built on evidence of their circumstances up to the time of decision.

Scenario 3: entered on a visitor visa with condition 8503

A person entered Australia on a visitor visa subject to condition 8503 and has since formed a relationship. Question 2 comes first: they cannot make a valid partner visa application unless a waiver of condition 8503 is granted. If the waiver is granted while their visitor visa is still in effect, and they lodge while they still hold it, the partner visa schedule 3 criteria do not apply. If they wait until after the visitor visa ends, they face both issues. The sequence and timing decide the outcome of the application before any relationship evidence is considered.

Question 8: What are the options if the partner visa schedule 3 criteria cannot be waived?

If the partner visa schedule 3 criteria cannot be met and there are no compelling reasons to waive them, the main alternative is to apply for a partner visa from outside Australia. An onshore application that is likely to be refused on Schedule 3 grounds should be weighed carefully against that alternative before any charge is paid.

Applying from outside Australia

An offshore partner application is made under the Subclass 309 partner visa. The partner visa schedule 3 criteria do not apply to an application made from outside Australia. The relationship requirements remain, and the applicant must meet the health and character requirements in the same way.

This is not a decision to make lightly. Departure ends any bridging visa the person holds and separates the couple for the processing period. For some people, however, an offshore application is the only realistic path to a grant.

Departure, exclusion periods and re-entry

A person who leaves Australia after being unlawful, or after holding certain bridging visas, may face an exclusion period that affects future visa applications. Partner visas have their own rules about how an exclusion period applies, and those rules depend on the person's history. The consequences of departure should be assessed before the person leaves, not afterwards. Leaving first and asking later can close options that were open before departure.

Other matters to consider

A person who is unlawful should not delay. The risk of detention and removal continues while they remain without a visa, and the circumstances that support an onshore case can change. Where there is uncertainty about the best path, the firm's guide to urgent immigration lawyer advice explains what to prepare for a first consultation.

Question 9: What happens if the Department refuses on Schedule 3 grounds?

If the Department refuses an onshore partner visa because the partner visa schedule 3 criteria were not met and not waived, the applicant can generally apply to the Administrative Review Tribunal for review, but the review deadline is short and strictly applied. The refusal letter states the deadline and how to apply, and it should be read on the day it arrives.

Review at the ART

The Tribunal reviews the decision afresh. It can consider new evidence, including evidence of circumstances that arose after the Department's decision, which is particularly important for a compelling reasons case. The Tribunal can affirm the refusal, or set it aside and remit the matter to the Department with a direction that the partner visa schedule 3 criteria are satisfied or should not be applied.

The review process is explained in the firm's articles on what to expect in an ART review after a visa refusal and on partner visa appeal options. The firm's commercial page on partner visa refusals explains how the firm acts in review matters, and the article on when to engage a visa appeal lawyer explains the role of representation.

Before a refusal: section 56 and section 57 letters

Before refusing, the Department may ask for more information about the partner visa schedule 3 criteria, or put adverse information to the applicant for comment. A section 56 request for more information or a section 57 natural justice letter is an opportunity to put the compelling reasons case properly. A response that simply repeats the strength of the relationship is unlikely to change the outcome.

Common reasons Schedule 3 cases fail

Schedule 3 cases commonly fail for avoidable reasons: the submission relies only on the relationship and separation hardship, the evidence of the claimed circumstances is missing, the account is inconsistent with the Department's records, or the evidence was never updated. Other refusal reasons are explained in the firm's articles on why partner visas get refused and on why Subclass 820 visas are refused. People who lodged their own application and now face a Schedule 3 issue can read about hiring an immigration lawyer after lodgement or getting an immigration lawyer second opinion.

Partner visa schedule 3 criteria help wherever you live in Australia

My Migration Lawyers advises on the partner visa schedule 3 criteria for clients across Australia, with consultations held by video. The firm acts for couples through its pages for partner visa lawyers in Sydney, partner visa lawyers in Melbourne, partner visa lawyers in Brisbane, partner visa lawyers in Perth, partner visa lawyers in Adelaide, partner visa lawyers in Canberra, partner visa lawyers on the Gold Coast, partner visa lawyers in Hobart and immigration lawyers in Parramatta. Where you live does not change the partner visa schedule 3 criteria. They are national rules applied in the same way everywhere.

How My Migration Lawyers assesses whether you can still apply onshore under the partner visa schedule 3 criteria

My Migration Lawyers assesses whether you can still apply onshore by working through every question in this article against your actual visa history and evidence before any application is lodged. The firm deals with complex cases, acts in many partner visa matters where the partner visa schedule 3 criteria are the central issue and is equipped to handle files with bridging visas, refusals, condition 8503 and long periods without a substantive visa.

The firm's work on a Schedule 3 partner visa matter usually follows these steps.

• Status check. The firm confirms your current visa, the date your last substantive visa ceased and the conditions on it, using the visa records and your passport details, and builds a complete visa history since your last arrival.
• Validity checklist. The firm checks every validity requirement: condition 8503 and any waiver, limits following a refusal or cancellation, presence in Australia, the charge and the documents that must be lodged with the application. Where an application cannot be made validly, the firm says so before any charge is paid.
• The statutory declarations. The firm identifies who can make the required statutory declarations, checks each person's status and makes sure each declaration is made within the six week period and confirms the relationship.
• The compelling reasons submission. The firm prepares a legal submission on the partner visa schedule 3 criteria, built on your own circumstances and evidence. The account of events is yours, reviewed and corrected by you. The firm presents it in the form the law requires and links each point to the supporting documents.
• Lodging. The firm lodges the complete application, sponsorship and evidence together, and advises on keeping the evidence up to date until the decision.
• Review. If the Department raises concerns, the firm responds to section 56 and section 57 letters. If the visa is refused, the firm advises on review and represents clients before the Administrative Review Tribunal.

The firm's partner visa services are described on the partner visa lawyers page, in the guide to choosing a partner visa lawyer and in the article on when you need an immigration lawyer for a partner visa. The partner visa practice is overseen by Weiwei Zhang, Principal Lawyer. More about the firm is on the about page.

If you do not hold a substantive visa and want to know whether you can still apply onshore under the partner visa schedule 3 criteria, book a consultation with My Migration Lawyers. You can also call 1300 040 300.