Partner Visa Undeclared Relationship

A partner visa undeclared relationship issue arises when the applicant, or sometimes the sponsor, did not declare a relationship, a marriage or a child in an earlier visa application, and that earlier answer is now inconsistent with the partner visa application. The partner visa undeclared relationship is one of the most common integrity problems the Department of Home Affairs identifies in partner visa files. It can usually be dealt with. It cannot be dealt with by hoping the case officer will not notice.

The typical partner visa undeclared relationship looks like this. An applicant applied for a visitor visa or a student visa and ticked "never married" or "single", while in fact they were already in a de facto relationship with their Australian partner, or were still legally married to someone else. Years later, the couple lodge a partner visa, and the relationship history in the new application does not match the earlier answer. The Department holds both applications. The case officer compares them.

This article explains what the law says about an earlier omission, when public interest criterion 4020 can be used to refuse a partner visa, when a visa a person already holds is at risk of cancellation, and how to correct the record properly. It is written for couples who are about to apply, couples whose partner visa application is already lodged, and couples who have received a letter from the Department about an inconsistency. If you need the general guide first, start with our complete guide to partner visas in Australia.

This article does not explain how to declare earlier relationships in a new application. That is covered in a separate guide. This article is about fixing an answer that was already given, and was wrong.

What is a partner visa undeclared relationship?

A partner visa undeclared relationship is a relationship, marriage or child that should have been disclosed in an earlier visa application or Department form, but was not, and which becomes visible when a partner visa is lodged. The earlier answer may have been wrong when it was given, or it may have become wrong because circumstances changed and the person did not notify the Department.

The phrase covers several different situations. Each one carries a different legal risk.

• The applicant declared themselves single in an earlier visitor, student, working holiday or skilled visa application, while already in a de facto relationship with the person who is now the sponsor.
• The applicant declared themselves never married while a previous marriage existed, or declared themselves divorced when the divorce had not yet been finalised.
• The applicant declared themselves married to a former spouse after the couple had separated, and now claims a de facto relationship with the sponsor that began during that period.
• A child was not declared as a member of the family unit or as a non-migrating dependant in an earlier application.
• The sponsor did not declare a partner or child in the sponsor's own earlier visa application, before the sponsor became a permanent resident or citizen.
• The relationship history given in an earlier partner visa application with a different partner was incomplete or untrue.

In every one of these situations, the partner visa undeclared relationship creates a conflict on the Department's own records. The new application says one thing. The old application says another. A case officer assessing a Subclass 820 partner visa or a Subclass 309 offshore partner visa must decide which version is true, and why the other version was given.

Why does a partner visa undeclared relationship matter?

A partner visa undeclared relationship matters because it engages up to three separate legal issues: the integrity criterion in PIC 4020, the possible cancellation of a visa the person still holds, and the credibility of the relationship evidence in the partner visa itself. Each issue has its own test. A couple can be safe on one and exposed on another.

The first issue is refusal. Public interest criterion 4020 in Schedule 4 to the Migration Regulations 1994 is a criterion for the grant of the Subclass 820, Subclass 801, Subclass 309, Subclass 100 and Subclass 300 visas. If the Department finds that false or misleading information was given in a material particular, within the scope of the criterion, the partner visa can be refused unless the criterion is waived.

The second issue is cancellation. A person in Australia usually holds a visa while their partner visa is processed, often the visa that contained the incorrect answer, or a bridging visa. Sections 101 to 105 of the Migration Act 1958 require answers in visa applications to be correct, and require a person who becomes aware of an incorrect answer to notify the Department. Section 109 allows a visa to be cancelled for non-compliance with those obligations. Our page on visa cancellations explains how cancellation decisions work in general.

The third issue is credibility. Even where PIC 4020 does not technically apply, a partner visa undeclared relationship affects how a case officer reads the whole application. If the couple say they have lived together since a particular date, but the applicant told the Department they were single after that date, the case officer may doubt the start date of the relationship, the 12-month de facto period, or whether the relationship is genuine at all. Our guide to why partner visas get refused explains how credibility findings drive refusals, and our article on the most common reasons Subclass 820 visas are refused shows where inconsistency fits among them.

What is PIC 4020 and how does it apply to partner visas?

PIC 4020 is the integrity public interest criterion. It requires that there is no evidence before the Minister that the applicant has given, or caused to be given, a bogus document or information that is false or misleading in a material particular, in relation to the current visa application or a visa the applicant held in the period of 12 months before the application was made.

The Department's procedural instruction on PIC 4020 identifies four elements, all of which must exist for an applicant to fail PIC 4020(1):

• there is evidence before the decision maker;
• that the applicant gave, or caused to be given, to the Minister, an officer, the Administrative Review Tribunal, a relevant assessing authority or a Medical Officer of the Commonwealth;
• a bogus document, or information that is false or misleading in a material particular;
• in relation to the application for the current visa, or a visa the applicant held in the 12 months before the application was made.

For a partner visa undeclared relationship, the fourth element is often decisive. The earlier omission is only within PIC 4020(1) if it was given in relation to the current partner visa application, or in relation to a visa the applicant held in the 12 months before the partner visa application was lodged.

PIC 4020 also contains other parts. PIC 4020(2) deals with an applicant, or a member of their family unit, who was refused a visa under PIC 4020(1) in the period starting three years before the current application was made. PIC 4020(2A) and (2B) deal with identity. PIC 4020(4) is the waiver. PIC 4020(5) defines what "false or misleading in a material particular" means. Each of these is explained below.

The 12-month look-back period

The 12-month period in PIC 4020(1)(b) is measured from the date the partner visa application was made, and it looks at visas the applicant held during that period. If the applicant held a visitor visa, a student visa or a working holiday visa at any time in the 12 months before lodging the partner visa, information given in relation to that visa is within scope.

This is why so many partner visa undeclared relationship cases involve visitor visas. A couple meet overseas, the applicant comes to Australia on a visitor visa, the couple decide to apply onshore, and the applicant lodges a Subclass 820 application while still holding that visitor visa. If the visitor visa application said the applicant was single, or married to someone else, the answer falls squarely within the 12-month window. Our guide to moving from a tourist visa to a partner visa explains the other risks in that pathway.

Information in older applications is treated differently. The Department's instruction states that where an application was refused or withdrawn earlier, the decision maker can only consider the information in it for PIC 4020 purposes if it reveals potential fraud in the current application, or in relation to the application for a visa held in the previous 12 months. An answer in an application made many years ago, for a visa the applicant did not hold in the 12-month period, is generally outside PIC 4020(1).

That does not make the older answer irrelevant. It remains relevant to credibility, to the relationship start date, and to any visa the person still holds. It can also become relevant to PIC 4020(1)(a) if the current partner visa application repeats it, contradicts it without explanation, or answers a question such as whether the applicant has ever given false information in a way that is itself untrue.

What does "false or misleading in a material particular" mean?

Information is false or misleading in a material particular if it was false or misleading at the time it was given, and it was relevant to any of the criteria the decision maker could consider in deciding the application, whether or not the decision was actually made because of that information. This definition is in PIC 4020(5).

Two practical points follow for a partner visa undeclared relationship.

First, timing matters. The information must have been wrong when it was given. If an applicant said they were single in a visa application, and only began the relationship afterwards, the answer was correct when given. The later change in circumstances may have triggered a duty to notify the Department, but it is not a false answer for PIC 4020(1). The Department's own instruction gives an example of an answer that was correct when given and was therefore outside PIC 4020.

Second, relevance is broad. Marital and relationship status is relevant to many visa criteria. For a visitor visa, it can be relevant to whether the applicant is a genuine temporary entrant with ties to their home country. For a student visa, it is relevant to family members and to the genuine student assessment. For a skilled visa, it is relevant to who is a member of the family unit. The Department must identify the specific criterion the information was relevant to, and it cannot rely on PIC 4020 itself as that criterion.

Purposeful falsity: an honest mistake is not fraud

An applicant does not fail PIC 4020(1) because an answer was wrong. The Full Federal Court in Trivedi v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCAFC 42 held that the information must have the quality of "purposeful falsity", although the applicant need not personally have known of it. The Department's procedural instruction adopts this. It states that a visa cannot be refused under PIC 4020 where the applicant can explain an innocent mistake.

This is the most important point in any partner visa undeclared relationship matter, and it is the point most often misunderstood. Many couples assume that any discrepancy means automatic refusal. It does not. The question is why the incorrect answer was given.

The onus, however, is on the applicant. The Department's instruction states that the applicant must explain why they did what they did and demonstrate that it was a genuine mistake, if that was the case. A vague explanation does not discharge that onus. A detailed, honest explanation, supported by evidence of the circumstances at the time, can.

Examples of explanations that may show there was no purposeful falsity include:

• the applicant was separated but not divorced, and answered "married" because that was their legal status, which may have been correct;
• the applicant did not understand that a de facto relationship counted as a relationship for the form, because in their home country unmarried couples have no legal status;
• a relative, education agent or travel agent completed the form and the applicant did not review it; or
• the question was ambiguous in the language or format in which it was presented.

Whether any of these explanations is accepted depends on the evidence. An explanation that the applicant "did not understand" will be tested against their education, their English, their earlier dealings with the Department and what they did afterwards. Where a third party completed the form, the Department may still find that the applicant caused the information to be given. These are matters that need legal advice from a partner visa lawyer before any explanation is written.

Disclosing it yourself does not automatically cure it

PIC 4020(3) provides that PIC 4020(1) and (2) apply whether or not the decision maker became aware of the false information because the applicant disclosed it. In other words, the law does not give an automatic amnesty to a person who confesses.

This point is often stated wrongly. Self-disclosure is still the correct course, for three reasons. It is a legal obligation under section 105 of the Migration Act 1958. It is strong evidence on the question of purposeful falsity, because a person who volunteers the correction is less likely to have intended to deceive. And it is directly relevant to the waiver in PIC 4020(4), because the Department weighs the applicant's conduct when deciding whether compelling or compassionate circumstances justify grant.

A partner visa undeclared relationship found by the case officer, after the couple gave a second inconsistent account, is far more difficult to resolve than one the couple identified and explained at the start.

Who does PIC 4020 apply to in a partner visa application?

PIC 4020 applies to each applicant individually. The Department's instruction states that in a combined application, each applicant must be assessed as if they had lodged their own sole application. If a secondary applicant gave the false information, it is that applicant who fails PIC 4020(1), not the primary applicant.

However, the partner visa criteria contain a "one fails, all fail" rule for certain public interest criteria. For the Subclass 309, for example, each member of the family unit who is an applicant must satisfy PIC 4020, among others. If a secondary applicant fails PIC 4020, the primary applicant fails that criterion, and the whole family's application can be refused. A partner visa undeclared relationship involving an included child, or an older dependent child who completed their own earlier application, therefore matters to everyone in the application.

The sponsor is in a different position. The sponsor is not a visa applicant, and the Department's instruction states that information a sponsor gives in their own sponsorship application is usually given on the sponsor's own behalf. The mere fact that the applicant allowed the sponsor to provide documents may not be enough for PIC 4020(1) to apply to the applicant. A sponsor's own earlier omission raises different issues, which are discussed below.

What is the three-year non-grant period?

PIC 4020(2) requires the applicant to satisfy the Department that, in the period starting three years before the current application was made and ending when the decision is made, neither the applicant nor any member of their family unit was refused a visa because of a failure to satisfy PIC 4020(1). If they were, the new application must be refused unless the criterion is waived.

This matters in a partner visa undeclared relationship case in two ways. It matters if an earlier visa application was already refused under PIC 4020 because of the same omission. And it matters for the future: if the partner visa is refused under PIC 4020(1), a three-year non-grant period follows for later applications that include PIC 4020, subject to waiver. The Department's instruction notes that the non-grant periods do not apply where the applicant was under 18 when the refused application was made.

This is one reason the response to a PIC 4020 concern should never be rushed. A refusal under PIC 4020 has consequences well beyond the current application. A refusal can also limit which other visas a person in Australia can apply for afterwards, because of the section 48 bar. Our guide to a partner visa after a visa refusal explains how earlier refusals affect a new application.

Can PIC 4020 be waived for a partner visa?

Yes. PIC 4020(4) allows the decision maker to waive PIC 4020(1) and PIC 4020(2) if satisfied that compelling circumstances affecting the interests of Australia, or compassionate or compelling circumstances affecting the interests of an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident or an eligible New Zealand citizen, justify the grant of the visa.

For a partner visa undeclared relationship, the waiver is often the most important part of the case. By definition, every partner visa has an Australian sponsor. The impact of refusal on the Australian partner, and on any Australian citizen children, can be a compassionate or compelling circumstance affecting the interests of an Australian citizen or permanent resident.

The Department's instruction makes several points about the waiver that couples should understand:

• the interests of the visa applicant themselves are not relevant to the waiver;
• the waiver is about existing compelling or compassionate circumstances, not about whether the decision maker agrees with an earlier refusal;
• a waiver applies only to the application being decided;
• the applicant must be invited to provide reasons why PIC 4020 should be waived, because they cannot be expected to know to do so otherwise; and
• there is no waiver for the identity requirements in PIC 4020(2A) and (2B).

A waiver is discretionary. It is weighed against the seriousness of the false information. A single wrong tick on a visitor visa form, explained frankly, is not weighed in the same way as a fabricated relationship history or a forged document. Evidence of the Australian partner's circumstances, their health, their work, their dependence on the applicant, and the interests of any children is central. The relationship itself must still be proven, and our guide to preparing evidence of a genuine relationship explains what that requires.

Common partner visa undeclared relationship scenarios

Most partner visa undeclared relationship cases fall into a small number of patterns. Identifying which pattern applies is the first step, because each one engages the law differently and needs a different explanation and different evidence.

The applicant said "single" on a visitor or student visa

This is the most common partner visa undeclared relationship. The applicant was already in a relationship with the Australian partner, but the earlier application recorded them as single or never married. Sometimes the applicant believed that an unmarried relationship did not need to be mentioned. Sometimes they were worried that disclosing an Australian partner would lead to a visitor visa refusal. Sometimes an agent completed the form.

The legal analysis turns on three questions. When did the de facto relationship begin? Was the applicant's answer false at the time it was given? And was that earlier visa held in the 12 months before the partner visa was lodged? If the relationship had not yet become a de facto relationship when the form was completed, the answer may not have been false at all. If it had, the reason for the answer becomes the central issue.

There is also a tension that couples sometimes do not see. The couple want to show a long relationship, to meet the 12-month de facto requirement or to make the relationship look established. But every month they add to the start of the relationship may make an earlier "single" answer more clearly wrong. The relationship history must be stated truthfully, even where the true date is less convenient. The Department will not accept a start date that moves to suit the issue being argued. Our article on whether you really need 12 months of de facto relationship explains the exceptions that may make the earlier date unnecessary.

The applicant said "married" after separating

Some applicants recorded themselves as married in an earlier application after they had separated from a former spouse, because the divorce had not been finalised. This is the reverse of the usual partner visa undeclared relationship. The earlier answer did not disclose the new relationship, and the partner visa application now claims that a de facto relationship with the sponsor began while the applicant was still legally married.

An answer of "married" given by a person who was separated but not divorced may have been correct, depending on the question asked. The Tribunal has dealt with exactly this issue. In TRUONG (Migration) [2024] AATA 680, a Subclass 820 matter listed among remittals in our database, the reported issue was false or misleading information in a material particular in a previous visitor visa application, concerning marital status, where the applicant was separated but still living together with a former partner. In Pham (Migration) [2021] AATA 4350, also a Subclass 820 remittal, the reported issue was an earlier visitor visa application in which the applicant answered "married" when separated at the time and later divorced, with the Tribunal noting credible witness and other evidence.

These decisions do not mean that every such answer will be accepted. They show that the Tribunal looks closely at what the person's legal and practical status actually was when the question was answered, and at the evidence of that status.

A previous relationship or visa application was not disclosed

Some partner visa undeclared relationship cases concern the applicant's earlier relationship history rather than the current relationship. The applicant may not have disclosed an earlier marriage, an earlier de facto partner, or an earlier partner or prospective marriage visa application with someone else.

In 2107016 (Migration) [2022] AATA 2250, a Subclass 820 remittal, the reported issue was that the parties failed to disclose details of a previous relationship and an earlier Subclass 300 visa application. In PALASIT (MIGRATION) [2026] ARTA 1914, a Subclass 820 matter, the reported issue was false or misleading information where a previous relationship was not declared, with the Tribunal considering whether there was an element of fraud or deception and the discretion to waive the criterion. In Pham (Migration) [2026] ARTA 1917, a Subclass 820 matter remitted after a Federal Circuit and Family Court decision, the reported issue was a previous application in which the applicant was a secondary applicant and a first husband was not declared.

Each of these cases turned on its own facts. Together they show that an undeclared earlier relationship is treated as a PIC 4020 issue, that the reason for the omission is examined, and that the waiver is a live question in partner matters.

The way the couple met was not disclosed

A partner visa undeclared relationship can also involve how the relationship began. Some couples meet through a marriage or introduction agency, or through family arrangement, and leave this out because they fear it will be held against them. Leaving it out can be more damaging than the fact itself.

In Yeung (Migration) [2020] AATA 4137, a Subclass 820 matter remitted after a Federal Circuit Court decision, the reported issues included incorrect information in the visa application and in Department interviews, and the fact that meeting through an introduction agency was not disclosed. Meeting through an agency or an arranged introduction is not, in itself, a reason to refuse a partner visa. The problem arises when the couple's account is shown to be incomplete.

A child was not declared

An applicant who has a child, from the current relationship or an earlier one, is usually required to list that child in later visa applications, even if the child is not coming to Australia. Leaving a child out can be a partner visa undeclared relationship issue in its own right. It is relevant to the members of the family unit, to health and character requirements for any included child, and to whether the relationship history is truthful.

Where the child is the sponsor's child too, an omission can also cast doubt on the relationship start date, because a child born to the couple is strong evidence that the relationship existed at a particular time. Our page on the sponsorship limitations explains a separate issue: sponsors with certain histories, including child-related matters, face restrictions on sponsoring.

The sponsor did not declare the relationship

Sometimes the omission belongs to the sponsor. A sponsor who became a permanent resident through their own visa may have been asked, in that earlier application, whether they had a partner or children. If the sponsor was already in the relationship with the current applicant and did not declare it, the sponsor's own visa record now conflicts with the partner visa.

This is a different partner visa undeclared relationship. PIC 4020 is a criterion for the applicant's visa, and the sponsor's earlier application was not an application by the current applicant. The Department's instruction states that a sponsor's information is usually given on the sponsor's own behalf. However, the sponsor's earlier omission can still raise credibility concerns about the relationship start date. And a sponsor who is a permanent resident, rather than a citizen, holds a visa that is itself subject to the incorrect information provisions of the Migration Act 1958. A sponsor in that position needs separate advice before the partner visa is lodged. The sponsor's earlier partner history is also relevant to the rules on when a sponsor cannot sponsor a partner visa.

Can an existing visa be cancelled for an undeclared relationship?

Yes. Separately from PIC 4020, a visa the person currently holds can be cancelled under section 109 of the Migration Act 1958 if the holder did not comply with the obligations in sections 101 to 105 of the Act. Those obligations include completing a visa application with no incorrect answers, and notifying the Department in writing, as soon as practicable, on becoming aware that an earlier answer was incorrect.

This is the second legal risk in every partner visa undeclared relationship matter, and it is the one couples most often overlook. PIC 4020 is a criterion for granting a new visa. The Department's instruction on PIC 4020 states that failure to satisfy PIC 4020 is a ground for refusal, not for cancellation. Cancellation of an existing visa for incorrect information is dealt with under different provisions.

Which visas are at risk?

Any visa the person holds can be at risk if it was granted on the basis of an application that contained an incorrect answer. That includes a visitor visa or student visa the applicant still holds while a partner visa is processed. It can include a permanent visa held by a sponsor who is not yet a citizen. Section 104(4) and section 105(2) of the Act state that the obligations to notify changes and incorrect answers apply despite the grant of any visa.

Where a person in Australia holds a substantive visa and a Bridging Visa A linked to their partner visa application, cancellation of the substantive visa can affect their position, including their work rights and their ability to travel. Our guide to bridging visas in Australia explains how bridging visas operate.

Does it matter that the mistake was innocent?

For cancellation under section 109, an innocent mistake does not remove the power to cancel. Section 111 of the Migration Act 1958 provides that the cancellation provisions apply whether or not the non-compliance was deliberate or inadvertent. This is a significant difference from PIC 4020, where "purposeful falsity" is required.

That does not mean an innocent mistake will lead to cancellation. Cancellation under section 109 is discretionary. Before cancelling, the Department must give the visa holder a notice under section 107, setting out the particulars of the possible non-compliance and inviting a response. The reason for the incorrect answer, the person's circumstances, and the consequences of cancellation, including for an Australian partner and children, are all relevant to whether the discretion is exercised. A person who receives such a notice should obtain advice immediately from a lawyer who handles visa cancellations, because the response period is short.

Other cancellation powers

The Migration Act 1958 also contains a general power, in section 116, that allows a visa to be cancelled in certain circumstances where incorrect information, given by or on behalf of the visa holder, was taken into account in a decision that enabled a visa application or led to a visa grant, and the giving of that information is not covered by the incorrect answer provisions. This power applies to the current visa or to a previous visa. It is less commonly used in partner visa undeclared relationship cases, but it is one reason the Department's response to an inconsistency can come from a direction the couple did not expect.

How does the Department find a partner visa undeclared relationship?

The Department finds a partner visa undeclared relationship mainly by comparing the partner visa application with its own records. Every earlier visa application the applicant and the sponsor made is held on the Department's systems. Relationship status, family members, addresses, travel and employment can be compared across applications in a way that individual applicants often underestimate.

The common triggers include:

• the relationship start date in the partner visa is earlier than a later application in which the applicant was recorded as single;
• the Form 80 personal particulars list a previous marriage or child not declared in earlier applications;
• the addresses in the partner visa show the couple living together during a period when an earlier application gave a different address;
• the sponsorship form lists a previous partner or children not mentioned in the sponsor's own earlier visa;
• travel records show the couple travelling together during a period when an earlier application said there was no relationship; and
• the Form 888 statements from friends and family describe the couple as a couple at a time when the applicant told the Department otherwise.

Some of these triggers come from evidence the couple themselves lodge to prove the relationship. That is why the partner visa relationship evidence must be reviewed against the earlier applications before lodgement, not after. Strong relationship evidence and an earlier "single" answer can sit side by side in the same file, and each makes the other more visible.

What happens when the Department raises the issue?

When the Department identifies a possible partner visa undeclared relationship, it must give the applicant an opportunity to comment before refusing under PIC 4020. In practice, this is done by a natural justice letter under section 57 of the Migration Act 1958, or by a request for information.

The Department's instruction states that the letter must identify what information is considered false or misleading and how it is relevant to a visa criterion, clearly identifying that criterion. It must invite comment, state how comments should be provided and set a time for the response. Because the waiver can apply, the applicant must also be given an opportunity to say why PIC 4020 should be waived.

A response to a PIC 4020 letter is the most important document in a partner visa undeclared relationship case. It should:

• address each piece of information identified as false or misleading, one by one;
• explain honestly how and why the incorrect answer was given;
• provide evidence of the circumstances at the time, such as who completed the form, the applicant's legal status and the relationship stage;
• address whether the information was material to the criteria for the earlier visa;
• set out, separately, the compassionate or compelling circumstances affecting the Australian partner, any Australian citizen children and any other Australian citizen or permanent resident; and
• remain consistent with every other document on the file.

Our guides to a section 57 natural justice letter for a partner visa and to responding to a section 56 request for more information explain the procedure for each type of letter. A response that is short, defensive or inconsistent can turn a manageable partner visa undeclared relationship into a refusal.

Can an interview reveal a partner visa undeclared relationship?

Yes. Case officers sometimes interview the applicant and the sponsor separately, and ask each about how the relationship began, when they moved in together, and what each told the Department in earlier applications. An inconsistency between the two partners' answers, or between an answer and the earlier form, is a common way a partner visa undeclared relationship surfaces.

The answer is not to rehearse a version of events. Interview answers must be truthful and in each person's own words. The answer is to make sure both partners understand what the earlier applications said, why, and what has since been disclosed to the Department, so that neither is surprised. Couples who are uncertain about what an earlier form said should obtain copies of their earlier applications before an interview, rather than guess. Our guide to Subclass 820 processing times explains how long the Department usually takes to decide an application.

How do you correct a partner visa undeclared relationship?

A partner visa undeclared relationship is corrected by notifying the Department in writing of the incorrect answer and the correct answer, with an honest explanation, and by making sure the partner visa application states the true position consistently. The Migration Act 1958 requires this. Section 105 requires a person who becomes aware that an answer in their application form was incorrect when given to notify an officer in writing, as soon as practicable, of the incorrectness and the correct answer.

Correcting the record is not a single form. It is a sequence of steps, and the order matters because of the cancellation risk and the PIC 4020 risk explained above.

Step 1: Find out exactly what was said before

The first step is to find out what each earlier application actually said. Many people do not remember the exact questions they answered years ago, or did not complete the form themselves. A correction based on memory can create a new inconsistency. Where copies are not available in ImmiAccount or from the person who prepared the form, a request can be made to the Department for copies of the person's own records.

Every earlier application by the applicant should be checked, and in many cases the sponsor's earlier applications as well. The aim is a complete list of every answer that is inconsistent with the true relationship history.

Step 2: Establish the true relationship history

The second step is to establish, with evidence, the true history: when the couple met, when the relationship became committed, when they began living together, when any earlier marriage or relationship ended, and when any child was born. This is the same history that will go into the partner visa, and the partner visa relationship statement must be consistent with it.

The relationship statement is always the couple's own account. A lawyer reviews it, identifies gaps and inconsistencies, and asks the couple to correct anything that is not accurate. The lawyer does not supply facts. In a partner visa undeclared relationship case, this discipline matters even more, because any detail that later proves wrong will be read as a second false statement.

Step 3: Assess the legal risk before anything is lodged

The third step is a legal assessment of each inconsistency. For each one, the questions are:

• Was the earlier answer false at the time it was given, or did circumstances change later?
• Was it material to the criteria for the earlier visa?
• Is it within the scope of PIC 4020(1), because it relates to the current application or a visa held in the 12 months before the partner visa application is made?
• Does the person still hold the visa that the incorrect answer relates to, so that cancellation under section 109 is possible?
• What is the honest explanation for the answer, and what evidence supports it?
• What compassionate or compelling circumstances affect the Australian partner and any Australian citizen children?

This assessment shapes how the correction is presented and when the partner visa is lodged. It does not change whether the correction is made. The obligation to correct exists regardless.

Step 4: Notify the Department using Form 1023

The Department's form for correcting an incorrect answer is Form 1023 Notification of incorrect answer(s). The form asks which document the incorrect information was given on, what the incorrect information was, what the correct details are and why the incorrect information was given. The form is signed by the applicant, and the form itself warns that failure to notify incorrect information can lead to visa cancellation.

Form 1023 is different from Form 1022. Form 1022 is used where an answer was correct when given but later became incorrect because circumstances changed. Our guide to Form 1022 change of circumstances explains when that form is required. In a partner visa undeclared relationship case, it is common for both to be relevant: Form 1023 for an answer that was wrong at the time, and Form 1022 for a relationship that began after an earlier answer was given.

The explanation in Form 1023 should be short, factual and complete. Where the explanation needs more space, a separate statement can be attached. Where a lawyer acts, a covering submission can set out the legal position, including purposeful falsity and the relevant visa criteria, while the client's own statement explains what happened in the client's own words. A lawyer appointed with Form 956 can lodge the correction and receive the Department's correspondence on it.

Step 5: Lodge a partner visa that tells the same story

The partner visa application must state the true relationship history, the true marital status and every child, and it must answer the questions about earlier visa history and earlier incorrect information truthfully. If the correction has been made, the partner visa should refer to it. If it is being made at the same time, the two documents should be lodged together or in a clearly connected way.

The partner visa undeclared relationship should then be addressed openly in the legal submission that accompanies the application, rather than left for the case officer to discover. Our partner visa document checklist and the 820 partner visa evidence checklist list the core documents. In a case with a past omission, the file will also need evidence that explains the omission.

When should the correction be made: before or after lodging?

The correction should be made as soon as practicable after the person becomes aware of the incorrect answer, because that is what the Act requires. In practice, most couples become aware of a partner visa undeclared relationship when they start preparing the partner visa, so the correction and the application are usually prepared together.

The position differs depending on the stage the couple is at.

Before the partner visa is lodged

This is the best time to deal with a partner visa undeclared relationship. The couple can identify every inconsistency, prepare the correction, prepare the waiver evidence and lodge an application that is consistent from the start. The timing of lodgement can be considered with the 12-month look-back period in PIC 4020(1)(b) in mind, but the correction itself must not be delayed to achieve a particular outcome. For couples in Australia, location and visa status also matter, and our pages on Schedule 3 waivers, the Schedule 3 criteria for unlawful applicants and the no further stay condition 8503 explain the separate rules that can apply.

After the partner visa is lodged but before a decision

If the couple realise after lodgement that an earlier answer was wrong, or that the partner visa itself contained a wrong answer, they should notify the Department as soon as practicable. A correction made voluntarily during processing is far better than one extracted by a natural justice letter. If a lawyer was not involved in the original application, this is the point at which advice matters most. Our guide to hiring an immigration lawyer after lodging your own visa application explains what changes when a lawyer takes over.

After the Department has raised it

If the Department has already sent a natural justice letter or a request for information about the partner visa undeclared relationship, the response must be prepared within the time given. The response should not simply apologise. It must address purposeful falsity, materiality and the waiver, with evidence, and must be consistent with everything else on the file. Where an extension is genuinely needed, it should be requested before the deadline, but it should not be assumed. Our guide to urgent immigration lawyer advice explains what to prepare when time is short.

After the partner visa is granted

The obligations in sections 104 and 105 continue after grant. A person who holds a temporary Subclass 820 or Subclass 309 visa and realises that an answer was wrong must still notify the Department. The permanent stage assessment for the Subclass 801 and Subclass 100 looks again at the relationship and at the public interest criteria. An inconsistency left uncorrected at the temporary stage can become a much larger problem at the permanent stage.

What evidence supports an honest explanation?

The evidence that supports an explanation in a partner visa undeclared relationship case depends on why the incorrect answer was given. The aim is to prove the circumstances at the time, not simply to assert them.

Useful evidence can include:

• evidence of who completed the earlier form, such as correspondence with an education agent, travel agent or relative who lodged it;
• evidence of the applicant's legal status at the time, such as a separation document, a divorce application or the date a divorce took effect;
• evidence of the relationship stage at the time, which may show that the relationship had not yet become a de facto relationship when the answer was given;
• evidence of the applicant's understanding of the question, such as the language in which the form was completed and the applicant's level of English at the time;
• the applicant's own statement, explaining what happened in their own words; and
• where relevant, statements from people with direct knowledge of the circumstances.

Some of this evidence overlaps with the relationship evidence. The Form 888 examples and common mistakes guide is useful here, because a supporting witness who describes the couple's history must give dates that are consistent with the corrected record. A witness who confidently places the start of the relationship earlier than the corrected history will undermine it.

What evidence supports a PIC 4020 waiver?

The evidence that supports a PIC 4020 waiver is evidence of compassionate or compelling circumstances affecting the interests of the Australian partner, any Australian citizen or permanent resident children, or other Australian citizens or permanent residents, or compelling circumstances affecting the interests of Australia. The applicant's own hardship is not relevant to the waiver.

Waiver evidence in a partner visa undeclared relationship case commonly includes:

• the Australian partner's statement about the effect refusal would have on them, in their own words;
• evidence of the Australian partner's health, employment, caring responsibilities and connection to Australia;
• evidence about any children, including their citizenship, schooling, care arrangements and relationship with the applicant;
• evidence of the length and depth of the relationship and the couple's life in Australia; and
• the nature of the original omission, how it occurred and what the applicant did once they became aware of it.

The Tribunal has considered waiver arguments involving Australian citizen children. In Xiao (Migration) [2024] AATA 575, a Subclass 820 remittal, the reported issues were false or misleading information, a false claim of a genuine spousal relationship in an earlier partner application, waiver of the requirement, and Australian citizen children. In NGUYEN (Migration) [2020] AATA 1932, also a Subclass 820 remittal, the reported issues included false and misleading statements and compassionate or compelling circumstances including the birth of the couple's second child. Again, each turned on its own facts. They show that the waiver is applied in real partner cases, and that evidence about the Australian family is central.

What if a partner visa is refused because of an undeclared relationship?

If a partner visa is refused under PIC 4020, the refusal is generally reviewable at the Administrative Review Tribunal. For an onshore Subclass 820 refusal, the applicant usually applies for review. For an offshore Subclass 309 refusal, the sponsor usually applies. The time limit for review is short and is strictly applied, so advice should be obtained the day the refusal is received.

The Tribunal reviews the decision afresh. It can consider whether the information was false or misleading, whether it was material, whether there was purposeful falsity and whether the criterion should be waived, on the evidence before the Tribunal at the time of its decision. New evidence can be provided. This is why so many of the decisions in this area are Tribunal decisions. Our guides to partner visa refusal appeal options and what to expect in an ART review explain the process. A visa appeal lawyer can advise on whether review is the right course. Our partner visa refusals service and our general visa refusals service deal with these matters.

Where the Tribunal decision itself involves a legal error, judicial review may be available. Several of the decisions referred to in this article were Tribunal decisions made after a court had sent an earlier decision back for reconsideration. Further Tribunal examples involving earlier relationships include Kann (Migration) [2023] AATA 2265, a Subclass 309 remittal where the reported issue was a previous visa application declaring a marriage in the home country with the husband as a non-accompanying member of the family unit, and Larney (Migration) [2020] AATA 224, a Subclass 820 matter remitted after a Federal Court decision, where the reported issues were false or misleading information, previous relationships and the mother of the applicant's children.

Mistakes that make a partner visa undeclared relationship worse

The mistakes that make a partner visa undeclared relationship worse are almost always attempts to manage the problem without disclosing it. The most damaging include:

• Repeating the earlier incorrect answer in the partner visa to stay consistent. This creates a new false statement in the current application, squarely within PIC 4020(1)(a).
• Moving the relationship start date to avoid the conflict. A start date chosen to fit an earlier form rather than the facts is itself false information, and it will usually conflict with the couple's own evidence.
• Leaving out evidence that shows the earlier date, such as photographs, leases or travel, in the hope that the conflict will not be seen. The Department can find the same information elsewhere.
• Giving different explanations at different times, for example one in Form 1023, another in an interview and a third in a natural justice response.
• Blaming a third party without evidence. An explanation that an agent completed the form needs evidence that the agent did so and that the applicant did not review it.
• Waiting for the Department to find it. A correction made only after the Department raises the issue carries less weight on the question of purposeful falsity and on the waiver.

Each of these mistakes takes an issue that could have been explained and turns it into evidence of an intention to deceive. A partner visa undeclared relationship handled honestly is usually a manageable legal problem. Handled dishonestly, it can become a refusal with a three-year non-grant period.

Do you need a lawyer for a partner visa undeclared relationship?

A partner visa undeclared relationship involves the integrity criterion, the cancellation provisions and the relationship criteria at the same time, and an error in any one can affect the others. The correction is a written admission to the Department. It should be accurate, complete and legally framed before it is lodged. Our guides on whether a partner visa lawyer is worth it compared with doing it yourself and on when you need an immigration lawyer for a partner visa explain where legal advice adds most value. Where another adviser has already acted, a second opinion from an immigration lawyer can identify whether the correction has been handled properly.

How My Migration Lawyers helps with a partner visa undeclared relationship

My Migration Lawyers acts for couples who have a partner visa undeclared relationship in their history, and deals regularly with the complex cases that follow from an earlier omission: a visitor visa answer that conflicts with the relationship start date, an earlier marriage or child that was left out, a sponsor's own undeclared relationship, and natural justice letters raising PIC 4020. We have acted in many matters of this kind, and we are well placed to handle them carefully and honestly.

On a partner visa undeclared relationship matter, the firm:

• obtains and reviews every earlier visa application by the applicant and, where relevant, the sponsor, and identifies each answer that conflicts with the true relationship history;
• advises on whether each conflict falls within PIC 4020(1), whether any current visa is exposed to cancellation under section 109, and what the honest explanation and supporting evidence are;
• prepares the Form 1023 correction, and any Form 1022 notification, so the record is corrected once, accurately and in the right order;
• reviews the couple's own relationship statement with them so that it is complete and consistent with the corrected record, while the account always remains the couple's own;
• prepares the legal submission addressing purposeful falsity, materiality and, where needed, the PIC 4020(4) waiver, including evidence about the Australian partner and any children;
• responds to natural justice letters and requests for information, and prepares the couple for any interview; and
• acts on review at the Administrative Review Tribunal where a partner visa has been refused.

The firm is led by Weiwei Zhang, Principal Lawyer. You can read more about My Migration Lawyers, our partner visa lawyers service, and our guide to the Subclass 820 partner visa. Couples with the onshore pathway in mind can also read our Subclass 820 visa guide, and couples planning to marry can read about the Subclass 300 Prospective Marriage visa. Same-sex couples can read our page on LGBTI partner visas.

Consultations are held by video, so the advice is available wherever the couple lives. My Migration Lawyers acts for couples dealing with a partner visa undeclared relationship across Australia, including through our pages for partner visa lawyers in Sydney, partner visa lawyers in Parramatta, partner visa lawyers in Melbourne, partner visa lawyers in Brisbane, partner visa lawyers on the Gold Coast, partner visa lawyers in Perth, partner visa lawyers in Adelaide, partner visa lawyers in Canberra and partner visa lawyers in Hobart. For broader migration matters, see our immigration lawyers in Sydney and immigration lawyers in Melbourne pages.

If an earlier application did not tell the whole story, the time to deal with it is before the case officer does. If you want your partner visa undeclared relationship assessed and the record corrected properly, book a consultation with My Migration Lawyers or call 1300 040 300.