Partner Visa Sponsor With Their Own Visa History Problems

A partner visa sponsor own visa history problem does not automatically stop an Australian citizen or permanent resident from sponsoring a partner. What matters is whether that partner visa sponsor own visa history creates a legal limitation, raises a credibility question or contradicts the relationship timeline now being put to the Department of Home Affairs.

Many sponsors are migrants themselves. They arrived on a student visa, a visitor visa, a skilled visa, a humanitarian visa or a partner visa. Some overstayed. Some held bridging visas for years. Some had visas refused or cancelled before they eventually became permanent residents or citizens. When that person later sponsors a partner, the Department does not look at the sponsor in isolation. It looks at the sponsor's full record in its own systems.

This guide explains when the partner visa sponsor's own visa history legally matters, when it does not, how the Department uses the sponsor's own records to test credibility, and how those issues are dealt with openly in the application. For the wider picture, read our complete guide to partner visas in Australia. For advice on a specific partner visa sponsor's own visa history, our partner visa lawyers can review the record before anything is lodged.

Partner visa sponsor own visa history: does it matter?

Yes, but only in specific ways. A partner visa sponsor own visa history matters when it engages a sponsorship limitation, when it makes the sponsor's account of the relationship less believable, or when earlier statements the sponsor made to the Department are inconsistent with what is now being claimed. It does not matter simply because the sponsor once had migration difficulties.

The starting point is the sponsorship criterion itself. For the Subclass 820 visa and the Subclass 309 visa, the applicant must be sponsored by their spouse or de facto partner who is 18 or over and is an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident or an eligible New Zealand citizen. Our page on who can sponsor a partner visa explains those categories. The test looks at the sponsor's status now. It does not ask whether the sponsor had a perfect migration record on the way to that status.

So the honest answer to most sponsors is this. The partner visa sponsor's own visa history is not a fifth criterion and it is not a character test of its own. It is background that the Department will read, and it becomes a problem only where it touches one of the legal questions the Department must decide.

Who this guide is for

This guide is for sponsors who are now Australian citizens or permanent residents but who have one or more of the following in their past: an overstay or a period as an unlawful non-citizen, a long period on bridging visas, an earlier visa refusal or cancellation, a protection or humanitarian pathway, a previous partner visa on which they were themselves sponsored, earlier sponsorships of other partners, or earlier declarations about relationships or addresses that do not match the current story. It is also for applicants who are worried that their partner's past will count against them.

Where the sponsor holds only a temporary visa, the position is different, because a temporary visa holder cannot sponsor a partner. Our answer on whether a temporary visa holder can sponsor a partner explains that rule.

When the partner visa sponsor's own visa history is not a bar

A partner visa sponsor's own visa history is not a bar where the sponsor is now a citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen, no sponsorship limitation applies, and the sponsor's account of the relationship is consistent with what they told the Department in the past. In that situation, earlier difficulties are history only.

A past overstay by a sponsor who is now a citizen

No partner visa sponsorship criterion turns on whether the sponsor once overstayed a visa. A sponsor who was an unlawful non-citizen years ago and later regularised their status, became a permanent resident and then a citizen, stands in the same legal position as any other citizen sponsor. The Schedule 3 criteria that apply to unlawful non-citizens apply to the visa applicant, not to the sponsor. Our guide to Schedule 3 criteria for a partner visa explains who those criteria affect.

This is a point that is often misunderstood. Couples sometimes delay applying for years because the sponsor fears their own past overstay will be held against the applicant. In law, that fear is usually misplaced. The relevant question is not whether the sponsor overstayed. It is whether anything the sponsor said during that period, or since, is inconsistent with the relationship now claimed. The guides on applying for a partner visa after overstaying and on a past overstay and a partner visa deal with overstay where it is the applicant who overstayed, which is a very different legal problem.

Bridging visas and long processing histories

Many sponsors spent years on a bridging visa while their own applications were processed. A history of Bridging Visa A, Bridging Visa B or Bridging Visa E does not in itself affect a later sponsorship. What it does create is a long paper trail. Every application lodged in that period contains declarations about relationship status, addresses and family. That paper trail is what the Department checks.

Earlier refusals and cancellations of the sponsor's own visas

An earlier visa refusal in the sponsor's past, followed by a later grant of permanent residence, is not a bar. The same is true of an earlier cancellation that was later set aside or followed by a new visa. The refusal or cancellation becomes relevant only if the reasons for it go to credibility, for example where a previous visa was refused because the Department found that the sponsor had given false information, or because an earlier relationship the sponsor relied on was found not to be genuine. Our guide to partner visa applications after a previous refusal explains how earlier findings are carried forward.

When the partner visa sponsor own visa history legally matters

The partner visa sponsor own visa history legally matters in three situations: where it triggers a sponsorship limitation, where it raises a doubt about the sponsor's credibility, and where the sponsor's earlier statements contradict the current relationship timeline. Each needs a different response.

Sponsorship limitations under regulation 1.20J

Regulation 1.20J of the Migration Regulations 1994 limits how often a person can sponsor a partner. In summary, a person may enter into at most 2 approved partner or fiancé sponsorships. A person who has sponsored a partner before cannot have another sponsorship approved until at least 5 years after the first visa application was made. And a person who was themselves sponsored as a spouse, de facto partner or fiancé cannot sponsor a partner until at least 5 years after their own visa application was made. Our page on partner visa sponsorship limitations explains each rule, and our article on when a sponsor cannot sponsor a partner visa works through common scenarios.

The third rule, in regulation 1.20J(1)(c), is the one that catches sponsors whose own visa history includes a partner visa. A sponsor who became a permanent resident through their own Subclass 820 or Subclass 309 application, and whose relationship then ended, cannot simply sponsor a new partner straight away. The 5 year period is measured from the date the sponsor's own visa application was made to the date the current sponsorship is decided. Departmental policy also treats a partner visa granted after the death of the sponsor as a sponsorship that counts for these purposes. If your partner visa sponsor's own visa history includes being sponsored before, our answer on what to do if a sponsor was sponsored before and on whether a sponsored partner can sponsor a new partner explain the practical steps.

Regulation 1.20J(2) allows the limitation to be waived where there are compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor. Departmental policy gives examples such as a dependent child of the sponsor and applicant, the death of the previous partner, a previous partner abandoning the sponsor with dependent children, or a longstanding new relationship. Those examples are not exhaustive. A waiver request needs evidence and a clear submission. If a sponsorship has already been refused on this basis, see our answer on challenging a refusal based on sponsorship limitations.

Contributory Parent visa holders

A separate limitation in regulation 1.20KA affects a sponsor whose own visa history includes a permanent Contributory Parent visa. In broad terms, a person granted a permanent Contributory Parent category visa who was already in a spouse or de facto relationship with their partner when that visa was granted cannot sponsor that partner for a partner or prospective marriage visa for 5 years from the grant. That rule exists to stop couples splitting a parent visa application to avoid costs. It can be waived only in compelling circumstances that are not finance related.

The Woman at Risk preclusion

There is also a narrow rule for sponsors whose own visa history includes a Subclass 204 (Woman at Risk) visa. For both the Subclass 309 and Subclass 820 visas, a woman granted that visa within the 5 years before the partner visa application cannot sponsor a man who was her former spouse or de facto partner when that visa was granted, or who was her partner at that time but was not declared to the Department. This is one of the clearest examples of a partner visa sponsor's own visa history directly controlling eligibility.

Credibility and the relationship timeline

Outside the formal limitations, the partner visa sponsor's own visa history matters most because of credibility. The Department must be satisfied that the relationship is genuine and continuing, and that the couple have a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others. When deciding that question, a case officer reads the sponsor's account alongside everything the sponsor has previously told the Department. Our guide to the genuine and continuing relationship test explains the legal test that credibility issues feed into.

If the sponsor's earlier applications described them as single when the couple now say they were already together, or listed a different address from the one the couple say they shared, the case officer will notice. Those inconsistencies are the real risk in most partner visa sponsor own visa history matters. A careful review of the partner visa sponsor's own visa history therefore starts with the records, not with the relationship statement.

Partner visa sponsor own visa history: what the Department checks

In a partner visa sponsor own visa history assessment, the Department checks its own records about the sponsor, compares them with the sponsorship and the visa application, and asks whether the two tell the same story. It does not need the sponsor to volunteer that history. It already holds it.

Departmental policy on the sponsorship limitations directs officers to have regard to the information provided by the sponsor in the sponsorship form and to Departmental sponsorship and nomination records. The sponsor's previous visa applications, previous sponsorships, previous relationship declarations, travel movements and citizenship records are all available to the case officer. Our answer on what documents a sponsor needs to provide and our guide to the Form 40SP sponsorship explain what the sponsor declares in the current application.

Relationship status in earlier applications

The most common problem in a partner visa sponsor's own visa history is relationship status. A sponsor who later became a permanent resident through a skilled, student, protection or humanitarian visa will have answered questions about whether they were married or in a de facto relationship. If the sponsor declared they were single at a time when the current application says the couple were already in a relationship, the Department will want an explanation. Sometimes the explanation is innocent: the relationship had not become committed at that stage, or the sponsor did not understand that a de facto relationship needed to be declared. Sometimes it is not. Either way, it must be addressed. Our article on an undeclared relationship in a partner visa covers the applicant side of the same problem.

Previous marriages and relationships

The Department will also look at the partner visa sponsor's own visa history for earlier marriages and de facto relationships. A sponsor who was previously sponsored as a spouse, or who sponsored a previous partner, has a documented relationship history in Departmental records. The current relationship timeline must fit around those earlier relationships. If the sponsor's previous partner visa application said the earlier relationship was continuing at a time when the sponsor now says the new relationship had already begun, that overlap needs to be explained carefully. Our guide to partner visa previous relationship history and to applying for a partner visa after divorce explain how earlier relationships are documented.

Addresses, travel and employment

Addresses are the second common problem in the partner visa sponsor's own visa history. The sponsor's earlier applications and the Department's travel movement records show where the sponsor said they lived and when they were in Australia. If the couple say they lived together from a particular date, but the sponsor gave the Department a different address in another application at that time, the case officer will ask why. The same applies to travel. A claim that the sponsor visited the applicant overseas must match the sponsor's movement records. Our guide to the partner visa evidence timeline explains how dates are checked.

Previous sponsorships, including withdrawn ones

Earlier sponsorships form part of the partner visa sponsor's own visa history even where they did not lead to a visa. A sponsorship that was lodged and then withdrawn, or a sponsorship connected to a refused application, may not count towards the regulation 1.20J limits, because policy counts only sponsorships that resulted in a visa grant. But the sponsor's declarations in those earlier sponsorships remain on the record and are still relevant to credibility. If the sponsor previously withdrew a sponsorship and the earlier partner later made a family violence claim, the Department will have that record too. Our answers on how a sponsor can withdraw a sponsorship and on whether a sponsor can sponsor more than one partner explain the rules.

Partner visa sponsor with a previous protection or humanitarian pathway

A partner visa sponsor's own visa history that includes a protection or humanitarian visa is not a barrier to sponsorship, but it often contains detailed sworn claims about family and relationships that the Department will compare with the current application. A sponsor who arrived as a refugee or was granted protection in Australia will usually have given extensive information about their spouse, children, family members and personal history.

If that information is inconsistent with the current relationship, problems arise. A sponsor who said in a protection application that they had no spouse, but who now says the current relationship began years before that application, has a credibility issue that must be explained. A sponsor who named a different spouse in their protection or humanitarian application, and who now sponsors someone else, will need to show when and how the earlier relationship ended. The Woman at Risk preclusion described above is a specific example of how undeclared relationships at the time of a humanitarian grant can directly prevent a sponsorship.

The response is not to avoid the issue. It is to obtain the sponsor's earlier records, identify exactly what was said, and explain any difference truthfully, with evidence. Where the earlier statement was wrong, the sponsor should take advice before the partner visa is lodged, because an admission can have consequences for the sponsor's own status. Our visa cancellations page explains the wider cancellation framework, and our article on false information refusals in partner visas explains how the Department approaches incorrect statements.

Earlier inconsistent declarations by the sponsor

Earlier inconsistent declarations by the sponsor are the single most important issue in this area, because they go directly to whether the Department believes the relationship account. Inconsistency does not automatically mean dishonesty. People make mistakes on forms, misunderstand questions about de facto relationships, and give approximate dates. But unexplained inconsistency is one of the commonest reasons a case officer forms the view that a relationship is not genuine.

Does PIC 4020 apply to the sponsor's statements?

Public interest criterion 4020 applies to the visa applicant, not the sponsor. It is engaged where there is evidence that the applicant gave, or caused to be given, a bogus document or false or misleading information in relation to the application, or in relation to a visa the applicant held in the 12 months before applying. Departmental policy on PIC 4020 states that a document or information a sponsor provides in support of their own sponsorship is usually provided on the sponsor's own behalf, and that the applicant merely permitting the sponsor to provide information is generally not enough. The decision maker has to look at what, if anything, the applicant did to cause that information to be given. Our guides to PIC 4020 in partner visas and the difference between an honest mistake and PIC 4020 explain the criterion.

That does not mean the sponsor's earlier statements are harmless. Policy also lists, as a trigger for further investigation, an applicant who has made claims inconsistent with claims made previously by themselves or their sponsor about their immigration history. And even where PIC 4020 is not engaged, a sponsor's inconsistent past statements can still lead a case officer to find that the relationship is not genuine and continuing. That is a refusal on the relationship criterion, not on integrity grounds, but the result for the couple is the same.

Explaining an innocent inconsistency

An innocent inconsistency in the partner visa sponsor's own visa history is explained by identifying it, stating plainly what the true position was, explaining why the earlier record was different, and providing evidence that supports the explanation. Vague answers do not work. A statement that says "I made a mistake" without saying what the mistake was, or why it happened, rarely persuades a decision maker. Our guides to explaining differences between relationship statements and to partner visa interview inconsistencies show the level of detail required.

The sponsor's marital history and multiple marriages

A sponsor who has been married more than once is not prevented from sponsoring a new partner, but the Department will want to see that each earlier marriage has ended and that the current relationship timeline is consistent with that marital history. Divorce documents, death certificates and separation dates all matter.

Overlapping relationships and religious marriages

Problems arise in the partner visa sponsor's own visa history where relationships overlap. A sponsor who entered a religious or customary marriage with the applicant while still legally married to a previous spouse raises two questions. The first is whether the current marriage is valid under Australian law. The second is whether the sponsor's account of when the earlier relationship ended is credible. Where the couple cannot rely on the marriage, they may still be able to apply as de facto partners if the legal definition is met. Our answers on whether a marriage is valid for a spouse visa, on polygamous marriages and spouse visas and on when an overseas marriage is not recognised explain the validity rules.

Earlier sponsored spouses

Where the sponsor has a series of earlier relationships with people from overseas, some case officers form the view that the sponsor may be facilitating migration rather than entering genuine relationships. That view is not a legal test, and it must be based on evidence about this relationship. But it means the current relationship needs particularly clear evidence across all four aspects of the relationship: the financial aspects, the nature of the household, the social aspects and the nature of the commitment. Our article on sham marriage concerns in partner visas explains how the Department approaches these cases.

How the Department assesses credibility using the sponsor's own records

The Department assesses credibility by comparing the sponsor's current declarations, the relationship statement and the evidence with its own records of everything the sponsor has previously told it. Where those sources agree, the partner visa sponsor's own visa history usually fades into the background. Where they conflict, the conflict becomes the focus of the case.

In practice, credibility concerns surface in three ways. The first is a request for more information under section 56 of the Migration Act 1958, which may ask the sponsor to explain an earlier declaration. Our guide to responding to a section 56 request explains the process. The second is an interview, where the sponsor may be asked directly about earlier relationships or addresses. The third is a natural justice letter under section 57, which sets out adverse information and invites comment. Our guide to the section 57 natural justice letter for a partner visa and to section 57 adverse information explain how to respond.

A sponsor's earlier record can also become relevant through the relationship statement. The statement is the couple's own account, and it must match the sponsor's records. Our guide to the partner visa relationship statement explains how it is structured, and Form 888 statements from people who know the couple can help corroborate the timeline where the sponsor's records are incomplete.

How the partner visa sponsor's own visa history is reviewed before lodgement

The partner visa sponsor's own visa history should be reviewed from primary records before any application is lodged, so that every limitation and inconsistency is identified while there is still time to address it. Waiting for the Department to raise an issue means answering it under a deadline and on the back foot.

Obtaining the sponsor's records

Sponsors rarely keep old visa grant notices, earlier application forms or copies of what they declared ten or fifteen years ago, and they should not be expected to. The partner visa sponsor's own visa history is obtained from the Department's own records. For a sponsor who is still a permanent resident, the current visa can be checked on VEVO. For the earlier history, and for a sponsor who is now a citizen, the usual route is a request to the Department under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 for the sponsor's own files, made with the sponsor's consent. Our guide to an FOI request for a partner visa explains when this is worthwhile. The sponsor's citizenship certificate or evidence of permanent residence is still needed for the current application, and our answer on how to prove a sponsor is an Australian citizen explains what is accepted.

Building a single timeline

Once the records are obtained, the partner visa sponsor's own visa history is laid against the couple's relationship timeline. Every earlier declaration about relationship status, previous spouses, addresses and travel is compared with the dates the couple now rely on. Where there is a gap or overlap, the reason is identified with the sponsor before anything is written. That exercise often shows that an apparent problem is not a problem at all, because the dates fit once they are set out properly.

Checking the limitations

The records also confirm whether regulation 1.20J, regulation 1.20KA or the Woman at Risk preclusion applies. The critical dates are the date the sponsor's own partner visa application was made, if any, the dates of any earlier sponsorships, and the expected decision date for the current application. Where a limitation applies, the options are to wait until the 5 year period has passed, or to prepare a waiver request with evidence of compelling circumstances.

Addressing the partner visa sponsor own visa history openly in submissions

The best way to deal with a partner visa sponsor own visa history problem is to raise it openly in the application, explain it, and support the explanation with evidence. A case officer who discovers an issue the couple have said nothing about will treat it more seriously than one the couple have already explained.

An effective submission does several things. It identifies the relevant record. It states the true position in plain terms. It explains why the earlier record was different, whether because of a misunderstanding of the question, a relationship that had not yet become committed, an error by someone who helped complete a form, or a later change in circumstances. It points to the evidence that supports the explanation. And it applies the law, for example by explaining why regulation 1.20J does not apply or why compelling circumstances justify a waiver.

The tone matters when a partner visa sponsor's own visa history is explained. A submission should not argue with the record or attack the earlier decision maker. It should accept what is accurate, correct what is not, and show why the current relationship meets the legal test. Our guide to partner visa relationship evidence explains how supporting evidence is organised.

Sponsor character and criminal history

The sponsor's criminal history is a separate topic. Sponsors must provide police certificates, and regulation 1.20KC allows a sponsorship to be refused where the sponsor has a conviction for a relevant offence and a significant criminal record, unless it is reasonable to approve it. Our guides to a sponsor's criminal record and to the partner visa police check explain those rules. This guide deals with migration history, not convictions.

When the sponsor's own permanent visa is at risk

Sometimes the partner visa sponsor's own visa history includes an active problem, not just a past one. The sponsorship must be approved and remain in force at the time of decision, and the sponsor must still be a citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen. If the sponsor's own permanent visa is cancelled while the partner visa is being processed, the sponsorship criterion can no longer be met unless that cancellation is set aside.

Where the sponsor's own earlier statements were wrong, and an admission in the partner visa application could expose the sponsor's own permanent visa to cancellation, the sponsor needs separate advice before anything is lodged. That is not a reason to hide the partner visa sponsor's own visa history. It is a reason to understand the consequences fully and to address them in the right order. Our guides to a partner visa after visa cancellation and on whether a current visa can be cancelled during a partner visa explain related situations.

What Tribunal decisions show about a partner visa sponsor's own visa history

Published Tribunal decisions show that partner visa refusals involving the sponsor's migration history, marital history and credibility can be remitted where the full picture is properly put before the Tribunal. The decisions below were remitted, which means the Tribunal sent the matter back to the Department for reconsideration. A remittal is not a visa grant, and each decision turned on its own facts.

• Nguyen (Migration) [2023] AATA 3868. A Subclass 309 matter involving a genuine spousal relationship, the sponsor's migration history and credibility concerns, the sponsor's marital history and the financial aspects of the relationship.
• Taylor (Migration) [2024] AATA 945. A Subclass 309 matter involving a genuine and continuing relationship, a visa history including overstay, previous applications, the withdrawal of a previous sponsorship and a claim of family violence, a valid marriage and supporting statements.
• HUANG (MIGRATION) [2026] ARTA 1553. A Subclass 820 matter involving a genuine and continuing relationship, the sponsor's multiple marriages, shared financial arrangements and joint travel to visit family.
• Cabsari (Migration) [2021] AATA 1432. A Subclass 820 matter remitted by the Federal Circuit Court, involving partners who were de facto at the time of application, a religious marriage while the sponsor was legally married to his first wife, and credibility.
• Huynh (Migration) [2023] AATA 92. A Subclass 820 matter in which the delegate was not satisfied about the genuine relationship, the sponsor had been in a previous relationship, and the Tribunal was satisfied about the genuine relationship at the time of application.
• Ly (Migration) [2022] AATA 409. A Subclass 820 matter concerning sponsorship requirements and the time limit before sponsorship, where the sponsor was a Contributory Parent visa holder and the parties had re-married in Australia.
• Promthong (Migration) [2024] AATA 2472. A Subclass 820 matter concerning sponsorship limitations, where the prior sponsorship had been approved within 5 years of the time of the primary decision.
• Vispo (Migration) [2023] AATA 694. A Subclass 820 matter in which the sponsor's permanent visa was cancelled and a differently constituted Tribunal set aside that cancellation.

These decisions illustrate a consistent point. A partner visa sponsor's own visa history, marital history and earlier declarations are examined closely, but they do not decide the outcome on their own. What matters is whether the whole record, properly explained, supports the relationship now claimed.

Partner visa sponsor own visa history refusals and ART review

If a partner visa is refused because of concerns arising from the partner visa sponsor's own visa history, the refusal can usually be reviewed by the Administrative Review Tribunal, which replaced the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on 14 October 2024. The application for review must generally be made within 28 days after notification of the decision, and that time limit cannot be extended. At the time of writing, the review application fee is AUD 3,727, with a 50 per cent reduction available in cases of severe financial hardship. For an offshore Subclass 309 refusal, the sponsor has traditionally been the person who applies for review.

Review is a fresh decision on the merits, and the partner visa sponsor's own visa history can be explained afresh. The Tribunal can consider new evidence, including the sponsor's records obtained after the refusal and a fuller explanation of any inconsistency. Our guides to the partner visa ART review process, to new evidence at Tribunal review and to partner visa refused appeal options explain the steps. Our partner visa refusals page sets out how the firm acts at review, and if the Tribunal itself makes a legal error, judicial review may be available.

How My Migration Lawyers helps a sponsor with their own visa history problems

My Migration Lawyers acts for couples where the partner visa sponsor own visa history is complicated: sponsors who once overstayed, sponsors who spent years on bridging visas, sponsors who arrived through protection or humanitarian pathways, sponsors who were themselves sponsored as partners, and sponsors whose earlier declarations do not match the relationship now claimed. The firm deals with complex partner visa cases, acts in many matters of this exact type, and is capable of handling them from the first records review through to grant, or at review if a refusal has already been made.

The work in a partner visa sponsor own visa history matter usually includes:

• Obtaining the record. Obtaining the sponsor's visa and immigration history from the Department's own records, including VEVO and an FOI request where appropriate, so the sponsor is not asked for old grant notices or forms they no longer hold.
• Mapping the timeline. Setting the sponsor's earlier declarations against the couple's relationship timeline and identifying every gap, overlap and inconsistency.
• Checking the limitations. Confirming whether regulation 1.20J, regulation 1.20KA or the Woman at Risk preclusion applies, and preparing a waiver request with evidence where compelling circumstances exist.
• The couple's own account. Taking instructions from both partners and presenting their own account and evidence, including an honest explanation of the partner visa sponsor's own visa history, in the form the law requires.
• Submissions. Preparing legal submissions that address the partner visa sponsor's own visa history openly and apply the relevant criteria.
• Responding to the Department. Preparing responses to section 56 requests, interviews and section 57 letters that raise the sponsor's past.
• Review. Applying to the ART within time if the visa is refused, and presenting the case at hearing.

The firm is led by Weiwei Zhang, Principal Lawyer. You can read more about My Migration Lawyers, or see our answer on how to book a consultation with My Migration Lawyers. We act for couples across Australia, including through our partner visa lawyers in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth.

If the application has already been lodged and you are worried about the sponsor's past, our guide to hiring an immigration lawyer after lodgement explains how the firm can step in, and a partner visa second opinion can identify problems before the Department does. Our article on a partner visa lawyer for applicants with visa history problems covers the position where it is the applicant, rather than the sponsor, whose history is the concern.

A partner visa sponsor own visa history issue is best dealt with before the Department raises it. Book a consultation with My Migration Lawyers online, or call 1300 040 300.