Partner Visa Sponsor Conflict of Interest When the Relationship Ends

A partner visa sponsor conflict of interest is the situation that arises when the Australian sponsor and the visa applicant are represented by the same lawyer and their relationship ends before the visa is decided. At that point a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest is almost unavoidable, because the two partners usually want different things from the same application.

The sponsor may want to withdraw the sponsorship, tell the Department the relationship is over, or protect themselves from allegations. The applicant may want to stay in Australia, rely on the family violence provisions, rely on a child of the relationship, or seek review of a refusal. One lawyer cannot advise both sides of those decisions. This guide explains why a separation creates a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, what the Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules 2015 require the lawyer to do, what happens to the private information each partner shared, how family violence claims and sponsorship withdrawals interact with the conflict, and the practical steps each partner should take next.

The complete guide to partner visas in Australia explains each subclass and stage, and the firm's partner visa lawyers page explains the work it does for sponsors and applicants.

Partner visa sponsor conflict of interest: what happens when the relationship ends?

When a couple who share one lawyer separate during a partner visa application, the lawyer must stop and assess the conflict, and may only keep acting for one partner in limited circumstances under rule 11.5 of the Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules 2015.

Until the separation, the lawyer was acting under a joint retainer. Both partners were clients. Both were owed duties of loyalty and confidentiality. Both wanted the visa granted. A separation changes that alignment. It turns a shared goal into two different goals, and that is the point at which a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest becomes an actual conflict rather than a potential one.

The lawyer's first obligation is not to pick a side. Practically, the lawyer will:

• stop taking instructions that would advance one partner's position against the other;
• identify what confidential information it holds from each partner;
• consider whether either partner will consent to the lawyer continuing for the other, and whether confidentiality can be protected if that happens; and
• confirm in writing to each partner who, if anyone, it can continue to act for.

That process can feel slow to a frightened applicant or an angry sponsor. It exists to protect both of them. The firm's guides to partner visa relationship breakdown and to what happens to a Subclass 820 application if the relationship breaks down explain the visa law. The short answers on what happens if the couple break up during processing and on whether to talk to a lawyer after separating during processing give the short version.

Why does a separation create a conflict of interest?

A separation creates a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest because the sponsor and the applicant each have legal choices that can harm the other, and a lawyer cannot act in the best interests of both while advising on those choices.

The Migration Regulations give the two partners different roles. The applicant made the visa application and must meet the Schedule 2 criteria. The sponsor made the sponsorship, gave the sponsorship undertaking and was assessed under the sponsorship provisions. While the relationship continued, those roles pointed the same way. After a separation, they diverge in predictable ways:

• The sponsor may want to withdraw the sponsorship. The Department's policy on the Subclass 820 visa refers to a sponsor withdrawing the sponsorship as evidence that the relationship may no longer meet the criteria.
• The applicant may want to continue. The Subclass 820 criteria allow an applicant whose relationship has ended to continue in some circumstances, including where the applicant or a dependent child has suffered family violence committed by the sponsor, or where there is a child of the relationship and the sponsor has custody, access or a maintenance obligation.
• The partners may disagree about what happened. The applicant's account of the relationship, its ending and any violence may be directly contrary to the sponsor's account.
• The sponsor may have personal exposure. A family violence claim alleges that the sponsor committed family violence. A sponsor may also want advice about the sponsorship undertaking or about sponsoring someone else in future.

Each of those positions is legitimate. Each partner is entitled to advice directed to their own interests. That is exactly why one lawyer cannot give it to both. Rule 11.2 of the conduct rules prohibits acting for two clients whose interests are adverse where there is a conflict of the duties to act in the best interests of each, unless rules 11.3 and 11.4 permit it, and once an actual conflict arises mid-matter rule 11.5 controls what happens next.

The relationship need not end in hostility for a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest to arise. An amicable separation still creates a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, because the applicant may now need to rely on criteria that depend on the relationship having ceased, and the sponsor may need advice on whether to tell the Department. The guides on temporary separation in a partner visa and repeated separations explain when a separation is treated as the end of the relationship, and the guide to the genuine and continuing relationship test explains the legal standard.

Is every disagreement between partners a conflict of interest?

No. A partner visa sponsor conflict of interest arises when the partners' legal interests become adverse, not every time a couple disagree about how to present the application or argue about something unrelated to the visa.

Couples disagree all the time. One partner may want to include more photographs, the other may think the evidence is enough. One may want to lodge now, the other may want to wait until a lease is in joint names. Disagreements of that kind are about strategy within a shared goal. The lawyer can advise both partners on them, explain the risks of each option, and take instructions in the way the engagement allows.

The position changes when the disagreement is about whether the shared goal still exists. Typical signs that a potential conflict has become an actual partner visa sponsor conflict of interest are:

• one partner says the relationship has ended, or has moved out with no plan to return;
• one partner asks the lawyer how to withdraw the sponsorship or how to tell the Department the relationship is over;
• one partner raises fear, threats, violence or control by the other;
• one partner asks the lawyer not to tell the other something that is material to the application; or
• the partners give the lawyer instructions that cannot both be followed, for example one wants to respond to a Department letter and the other wants the application withdrawn.

When any of those signs appears, the lawyer should treat the matter as a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest and assess it before acting further. A short pause to assess is better than continuing on instructions that later prove to have been given against the other client's interests. A couple who later reconcile can revisit the position, but the lawyer cannot assume a reconciliation will happen.

What do the conduct rules require when the conflict arises?

The conduct rules require the lawyer to stop acting for both partners unless one of them gives informed consent to the lawyer continuing for the other and the confidentiality of both can be fully protected.

Rule 11.5 of the Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules 2015 is headed "Actual conflict arising between current clients in the course of a matter". It applies where a solicitor acts for more than one client in a matter and, during the matter, an actual conflict arises between the duties owed to two or more of them. The solicitor may only continue to act for one of those clients in exceptional circumstances, and only where:

• any client for whom the solicitor ceases to act has given informed consent to the solicitor continuing to act for the remaining client; and
• the duty of confidentiality owed to all of the clients, both those for whom the solicitor ceases to act and those for whom it continues to act, is not put at risk.

Both conditions must be met. In a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, the second condition is usually the harder one. During the joint retainer each partner will have spoken openly to the lawyer about the relationship, their finances, their history and sometimes their fears. If the lawyer continued for one partner, that knowledge could be used, even unintentionally, against the other.

Three other rules also matter:

• Rule 9 protects information confidential to each client, subject to limited exceptions in rule 9.2.
• Rule 10 deals with former clients. Once the lawyer stops acting for a partner, that partner becomes a former client, and rule 10.2 prevents the lawyer acting against them where it holds their confidential information that is material to the matter and might be detrimental if disclosed, unless the former client gives informed consent or an effective information barrier has been established.
• Rule 13 deals with ending an engagement. Rule 13.1 recognises that a law practice may terminate an engagement for just cause and on reasonable notice. A conflict that prevents the lawyer acting is the kind of situation in which the engagement may need to end.

The firm's guide to what a partner visa lawyer costs agreement should cover explains why conflict terms belong in the written engagement from the start.

Can the lawyer keep acting for the applicant or the sponsor?

Sometimes, but only if the partner the lawyer stops acting for gives informed consent and the confidentiality of both partners is not put at risk. In many separations those conditions cannot be met, and the lawyer must cease acting for both.

Continuing for the applicant

An applicant who has relied on the lawyer for the whole application often wants the lawyer to continue. That is understandable, because the lawyer knows the file. It is possible only if the sponsor gives informed consent to the lawyer continuing for the applicant, and the lawyer can do so without using or risking the sponsor's confidential information. Where the applicant intends to make a family violence claim against the sponsor, it is very unlikely that both conditions can be met, because the claim is directly adverse to the sponsor and the lawyer will hold the sponsor's private information.

Continuing for the sponsor

A sponsor who paid for the legal work sometimes assumes the lawyer is "their" lawyer. That is not how a joint retainer works. Paying for the work did not make the sponsor the only client. The lawyer can continue for the sponsor only if the applicant gives informed consent and the applicant's confidentiality is protected. Advice to a sponsor about withdrawing the sponsorship, or about responding to the applicant's claims, is adverse to the applicant and will rarely be possible for the lawyer who acted for both.

Ceasing for both

Where neither partner consents to the lawyer continuing in a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, or confidentiality cannot be protected, the lawyer must cease acting for both. That outcome is common and it is not a failure. It is the conduct rules working as intended. The lawyer will notify each partner in writing, tell the Department that its appointment has ended, and arrange for each partner to receive what belongs to them from the file. The firm's guide to Form 956 and 956A explains how appointments end, and the guide to the partner visa two-stage process explains why the stage the application has reached matters.

What happens to the information each partner told the lawyer?

Information each partner gave the lawyer remains protected by the duty of confidentiality, and the lawyer cannot use one partner's confidential information to advance the other partner's position after a separation.

During a joint retainer, the engagement usually authorises the lawyer to share information relevant to the joint matter between the two clients. That authority was given for a shared purpose: obtaining the visa. It does not authorise the lawyer to use information against one partner once their interests are adverse. Rule 9.1 prohibits disclosure of information confidential to a client, and rule 9.2 lists the limited exceptions, including where the client authorises disclosure, where the law permits or compels it, and where disclosure is for the purpose of preventing imminent serious physical harm to the client or another person.

In a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, the information that most often causes difficulty includes:

• private statements by one partner about the other's behaviour, made in confidence during the joint retainer;
• the sponsor's criminal history, police checks and any discussion of convictions;
• the sponsor's previous sponsorships or relationships;
• the applicant's visa history, health information or earlier relationships; and
• financial details each partner gave to support the evidence of the relationship.

The lawyer cannot pass any of that to the other partner's new lawyer without authority, and cannot use it in advising either partner against the other. That protection runs to both partners. A sponsor who confided in the lawyer about personal difficulties is protected in the same way as an applicant who confided about fear of the sponsor.

Documents that were already lodged

Documents that were lodged with the Department are different. They are part of the application and the Department holds them. Each partner's new lawyer can work from what the Department holds, and a partner can seek access to their own records from the Department. What remains confidential is the private communication between each partner and the lawyer, not the lodged application itself.

Each partner's own statements

Each partner's relationship statement and the Form 888 statements of witnesses were lodged to support a relationship that has now ended. They remain on the Department's file. A sponsor who now says the relationship was never genuine, or an applicant who now describes it differently, will be measured against what was lodged. The guides to conflicting statements in a partner visa and to information from an ex-partner or a tip-off explain how those differences are treated.

Partner visa sponsor conflict of interest and family violence claims

A family violence claim is the clearest partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, because the applicant relies on the sponsor having committed family violence, and the lawyer who acted for both cannot advise the applicant on a claim against its other client.

Division 1.5 of the Migration Regulations sets out the special provisions relating to family violence. Under the Subclass 820 criteria, an applicant whose relationship with the sponsor has ceased may still meet the requirements if the applicant, or a dependent child of the sponsor, of the applicant or of both, has suffered family violence committed by the sponsor. Equivalent provisions apply at the Subclass 801 and Subclass 100 stages. The Department's policy states that the family violence, or part of it, must have occurred while the relationship existed.

Claims are either judicially determined or non-judicially determined. Judicially determined evidence includes a Family Law Act injunction, a State or Territory court order, or a conviction or finding of guilt against the alleged perpetrator in respect of the alleged victim, and must be accepted. Non-judicially determined claims are supported by prescribed evidence from professionals and may be referred to an independent expert if the decision maker is not satisfied. The firm's guides to partner visa family violence evidence, family violence claims without a police report and the short answers on what evidence a family violence claim needs and whether a police report or court order is required explain the evidence.

What the Department tells the sponsor

The Department's own process is built to protect the applicant once a family violence claim is made, whatever stage the partner visa sponsor conflict of interest has reached. Department policy states that:

• no contact should be made with the alleged perpetrator about the alleged victim or their application;
• decision makers are not to ask the alleged perpetrator whether family violence has occurred, and are not to discuss it further even if the alleged perpetrator raises it and denies it;
• information cannot be disclosed to third parties, including the sponsor or alleged perpetrator, without the applicant's written permission; and
• decision makers must not disclose whether a family violence claim has been made, or the status of the application, to any person without the applicant's written consent.

Policy also recognises that an alleged perpetrator may not be an objective or unbiased source of information once a relationship has ceased. A sponsor who contacts the Department after a separation should expect that the Department will not engage with them about the applicant's claims.

Why the authorised recipient matters

Department policy directs decision makers to exercise caution if the alleged perpetrator is listed as the authorised recipient, and to give the applicant an opportunity to revise that authority before information about a family violence claim is sent. Where one lawyer was authorised recipient for both partners, the applicant should change that arrangement promptly, through a new representative or in writing. The firm's family violence partner visa lawyers page, the guide on partner visa family violence options and the short answer on what to do when a sponsor is abusive explain the applicant's options. Anyone in immediate danger should call 000.

What happens when the sponsor withdraws the sponsorship?

When the sponsor withdraws the sponsorship, the Department will usually treat the relationship as having ended and, unless the applicant meets an alternative criterion such as family violence or a child of the relationship, the visa will be refused after the applicant is given a chance to comment.

A sponsor is entitled to withdraw. That is a decision for the sponsor, and a sponsor in a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest should make it with their own advice rather than with the lawyer who also acted for the applicant. The consequences for the applicant are significant, but the sponsor's withdrawal does not by itself decide the outcome. The Department's policy on the Subclass 820 visa contemplates alternative pathways where the relationship has ceased:

• Family violence. Where the applicant, or a dependent child, has suffered family violence committed by the sponsor while the relationship existed.
• A child of the relationship. Where the applicant has custody of, joint custody of, or access to a child, or a parenting order, and the sponsor has custody or access rights, a parenting order or a maintenance obligation for that child.
• Death of the sponsor. A separate provision applies where the sponsor has died, which is not a separation but sometimes arises in the same files.

Policy explains that one purpose of these provisions is to avoid a visa applicant feeling compelled to remain in a violent relationship for fear of losing eligibility for permanent residence. The sponsor cannot prevent the applicant from relying on them. The short answers on whether a sponsor can withdraw sponsorship after the application is made, what happens if the sponsor withdraws and the couple reconcile and getting help when there is a child together but the couple separated explain these pathways. The guide to partner visa child custody and consent deals with the child-related evidence.

Published Tribunal decisions recorded in the firm's database of partner visa remittals show how a sponsorship withdrawal and the alternative criteria interact:

• In Haikin (Migration) [2019] AATA 3241, a Subclass 820 matter, the issues recorded were sponsorship withdrawn, relationship with sponsor ceased, and family violence victim. The Tribunal remitted the matter.
• In Kiboss (Migration) [2020] AATA 2616, a Subclass 820 matter, the issues recorded were withdrawal of sponsorship, the relationship had ceased, victim of domestic violence, and parties validly married. The Tribunal remitted the matter.
• In Phan (Migration) [2020] AATA 513, a Subclass 820 matter, the issues recorded were relationship ceased, sponsorship withdrawn, child of the relationship, and biological parentage confirmed. The Tribunal remitted the matter.
• In 1906182 (Migration) [2023] AATA 1921, a Subclass 820 matter, the issues recorded were relationship ceased and sponsorship withdrawn, a judicially determined claim of family violence, the spousal relationship before the relationship ceased, and validly married. The Tribunal remitted the matter.

Each case turns on its own facts. Together they show that in a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, a sponsor's withdrawal is the beginning of the legal question, not the end of it.

Does a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest play out differently for Subclass 309 and Subclass 300 applications?

Yes. The relationship-ended provisions and the right to seek review differ between the offshore Subclass 309, the Subclass 300 prospective marriage visa and the onshore Subclass 820, so the practical effect of a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest depends on the subclass.

Subclass 309 and Subclass 100

The Subclass 309 criteria contain their own relationship-ended provisions. Under subclause 309.221(3), an applicant whose relationship with the sponsor has ended may still meet the requirements where the applicant, or a dependent child of either or both partners, has suffered family violence committed by the sponsor, or where there is a child of the relationship and the sponsor has custody, access, a parenting order or a maintenance obligation. At the permanent Subclass 100 stage, equivalent provisions apply under subclauses 100.221(4) and 100.221(4C) to applicants who entered Australia holding the Subclass 309 visa, or who were in Australia when it was granted. The firm's Subclass 309 partner visa page explains the offshore pathway.

Subclass 300 prospective marriage visa

A prospective marriage visa depends on the couple intending to marry. If the relationship ends before the marriage, the basis for the visa falls away. The Subclass 820 criteria do, however, contain a specific provision for a person who held a Subclass 300 visa, married the sponsor while that visa was valid, and whose relationship then ceased where family violence was committed by the sponsor. The review right is also different. For a Subclass 300 refusal, the sponsor is the person who applies for review. After a separation, that sponsor may have no wish to do so, and the applicant cannot apply in the sponsor's place. That makes independent advice for each partner even more urgent in a Subclass 300 partner visa sponsor conflict of interest. The firm's Subclass 300 prospective marriage visa page and the short answer on what happens if a couple break up on a prospective marriage visa explain the position.

Subclass 820 and Subclass 801

The onshore Subclass 820 visa has the provisions discussed above, and the permanent Subclass 801 visa has equivalent provisions where the relationship ceases after the Subclass 820 grant. The firm's Subclass 820 partner visa page explains the onshore pathway.

What should the applicant do next?

In a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, the applicant should obtain independent advice immediately, change the authorised recipient if needed, and protect the response periods and visa deadlines that continue to run while the conflict is resolved.

In practical terms, an applicant facing a separation should:

• Get separate legal advice. The lawyer who acted for both partners may not be able to continue. Waiting for that to be resolved can cost time.
• Check who receives the Department's letters. If the joint lawyer or the sponsor is the authorised recipient, the applicant should arrange for correspondence to come to the applicant or a new representative.
• Notify the change in circumstances. The Department's policy notes that section 104 of the Migration Act requires applicants to tell the Department in writing about changes that make an answer on the application incorrect, including the end of the relationship. The applicant's new lawyer can advise on how and when.
• Keep evidence of the relationship before it ended. Each alternative pathway requires the Department to be satisfied that the relationship was genuine until it ceased.
• Keep evidence of any family violence. That includes police records, court orders, medical records and reports from professionals.
• Check the bridging visa. A Bridging visa A linked to an onshore application continues while the application is undecided. If the visa is refused, it ceases 35 days after notification of the refusal, or 35 days after the Tribunal decides the review if review is sought, under clause 010.511.

The firm's guides to the partner visa bridging visa, what a Bridging visa A is for a partner visa, family violence after separation and the short answer on getting a lawyer after separation and family violence explain each step.

What should the sponsor do next?

The sponsor should obtain their own advice before taking any step with the Department, because withdrawing the sponsorship, making allegations, or saying nothing each carries consequences for the sponsor as well as the applicant.

In a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, the sponsor is often the partner who acts first. Some sponsors write to the Department the day they separate. Others wait. Neither approach is automatically right. Points a sponsor should consider with their own lawyer include:

• Whether and how to withdraw the sponsorship. Withdrawal is the sponsor's decision. It should be accurate, factual and not made in anger.
• The sponsorship undertaking. The sponsor gave written undertakings when the sponsorship was made. The firm's guides to what the sponsor signs in the undertaking and to partner visa sponsor obligations after grant explain what was promised.
• Future sponsorships. Under regulation 1.20J, a sponsorship that results in the grant of a visa counts towards the sponsor's limit of two approved partner sponsorships and starts a five-year period. Department policy states that a sponsorship counts even where the applicant was later granted a permanent visa on family violence grounds, because the grant resulted from the original sponsorship. A sponsorship connected to a refused application does not count. The firm's partner visa sponsorship limitations page and the short answer on whether a person can sponsor more than one partner explain the rule.
• Information about the applicant. In a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, a sponsor who believes the relationship was not genuine may want to tell the Department. Any information given must be true and should be given with advice. Department policy recognises that an alleged perpetrator may not be an objective source once a relationship has ended, and the Department will not discuss a family violence claim with the alleged perpetrator.
• Any court proceedings. Family law, property or protection order proceedings run separately from the visa and from the partner visa sponsor conflict of interest. A sponsor should keep those matters with the appropriate lawyers.

A sponsor who was themselves sponsored as a partner should also check the five-year rule before starting a new relationship sponsorship. The short answer on sponsoring a new partner after being sponsored on a partner visa and the guide on when a sponsor cannot sponsor a partner visa explain the limitation. The firm's guide to the partner visa sponsor at the second stage explains what changes after the temporary visa is granted.

Partner visa sponsor conflict of interest during an ART review

A separation during a Tribunal review creates the same partner visa sponsor conflict of interest as a separation before the Department, and the lawyer must assess whether it can continue for the review applicant.

For a Subclass 820 refusal, the applicant is the review applicant. For a Subclass 300 refusal, the sponsor is the review applicant. For a Subclass 309 refusal, the visa applicant applies under regulation 4.02(5)(raa). The application for review must be made within 28 days after notification of the decision, or 7 days if the applicant is in immigration detention, and the time cannot be extended. The migration review application fee is AUD 3,727 for fees paid on or after 1 July 2026, with a 50% reduction for financial hardship and a 50% refund if the decision is set aside, varied or remitted. The firm's guides to the partner visa ART review process, partner visa ART fees and working out the review deadline explain the steps.

The Tribunal considers the matter afresh, including events after the refusal. A relationship that ended during the review may still allow the applicant to succeed on a family violence or child-related criterion. The short answers on whether a review can continue after separation and raising family violence during a review explain how. Where a review deadline is close, the firm's urgent ART refusal applications page explains how urgent lodgement is approached, and the short answer on what happens to the bridging visa after a refusal explains the 35-day rule.

At a hearing in a review affected by a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, the sponsor is usually a witness rather than a party in a Subclass 820 or Subclass 309 review. A separated sponsor may give evidence that conflicts with the applicant's. The applicant's lawyer must be free to test that evidence, which is another reason the lawyer who acted for both partners will rarely be able to continue. The firm's guide to changing lawyers before an ART hearing explains how a change of representative is managed close to a hearing.

What if the couple reconcile after the conflict arises?

If the couple reconcile, the visa may be able to proceed on the original relationship basis, but the lawyer can only act for both partners again with fresh informed consent and after assessing whether the earlier conflict still affects its duties.

Reconciliation after a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest is not unusual. A sponsor who withdrew in anger may want to re-confirm support. The Department will want to understand what happened, and the applicant and sponsor may each need to explain the separation and the reconciliation consistently. From a conduct perspective, the lawyer must consider what each partner disclosed during the conflict, whether either partner said things about the other that remain sensitive, and whether a fresh joint retainer is in the best interests of each. The short answer on what happens if the sponsor withdraws and the couple reconcile explains the visa side. Where the separation involved family violence, a joint retainer after reconciliation calls for particular care, because the applicant's safety and freedom of choice come first.

How does each partner find separate representation?

Each partner finds separate representation by engaging their own lawyer, who lodges a new Form 956 appointment, obtains the relevant file material, and takes over any response periods or deadlines that are running.

The handover is where time is most often lost in a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest. A response to a section 56 request or a section 57 letter does not stop because the lawyer has a conflict. Practical steps for each partner are:

• engage a new lawyer promptly and give them the dates of any letters received;
• complete a new Form 956 so the Department knows who now represents that partner, and decide who will be authorised recipient;
• ask the former lawyer for the documents and correspondence that belong to that partner; and
• tell the new lawyer about any deadline, interview or hearing already scheduled.

In a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest, the former lawyer will release each partner's own material to that partner while protecting the other partner's confidential information. The guides to changing partner visa lawyers mid-application and how to change your immigration lawyer in Australia explain the file transfer. If a refusal has already issued, the firm's partner visa refusals page and the wider visa refusals page explain the options, and the guide to partner visas after divorce covers later applications with a new partner.

How My Migration Lawyers handles a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest

My Migration Lawyers deals with complex partner visa cases, acts in many matters where a relationship has ended during the application, and is capable of advising applicants and sponsors when a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest arises. The firm's Principal Lawyer is Weiwei Zhang, and the firm's approach is explained on the about My Migration Lawyers page.

The firm can act for both the sponsor and the applicant under a joint retainer where each gives informed consent. If a conflict arises, the firm assesses it under the Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules, including rule 11 on conflicts and rule 9 on confidentiality, and confirms in writing who it can continue to act for. Depending on the circumstances, the firm may be required to cease acting for one or both partners.

Where a partner visa sponsor conflict of interest arises and the firm is able to act, it:

• identifies immediately which deadlines, requests and bridging visa dates are running;
• assesses the conflict under rules 9, 10 and 11 and confirms its position to each partner in writing;
• advises the applicant it acts for on the family violence provisions, child-related criteria and evidence of the relationship before it ceased;
• presents the applicant's own account and evidence in the form the law requires, with the applicant reviewing and correcting their own statement;
• advises a sponsor it acts for on withdrawal, the sponsorship undertaking and the effect of regulation 1.20J on future sponsorships;
• updates Form 956 and authorised recipient details so letters reach the right person; and
• acts on review at the Administrative Review Tribunal where a refusal has issued.

For matters involving family violence, the firm's guide to the work a lawyer does on family violence claims and the short answer on getting a lawyer for a family violence claim explain the process. The firm acts across Australia, including through its partner visa lawyers in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide, and the short answer on whether there is a partner visa lawyer who handles complex cases explains the type of work involved.

A partner visa sponsor conflict of interest needs independent advice quickly, because deadlines do not pause. Book a consultation with My Migration Lawyers, or call 1300 040 300.