A partner visa “double grant,” where both the temporary and permanent partner visas are granted at the same time, is possible for couples in a “long-term relationship.” It’s a highly desirable outcome that provides certainty and allows you to settle into your new life in Australia without a further application looming over you.
We previously wrote about the benefits of a double partner visa grant, which you can read here.
However, the question many couples face, especially those with a history of long-distance, is how does the Department of Home Affairs assess a “long-term relationship”? Is it automatic? And crucially, can you qualify if you haven’t physically lived together for the entire required period?
These are precisely the questions we addressed in a recent case for one of our clients. Their partner visa case study story highlights how the nuances of a relationship, when presented correctly, can lead to an outstanding result.
Disclaimer: The information in this article is for general guidance only and is not intended as legal advice. Immigration laws and policies change regularly, and individual circumstances can significantly impact visa eligibility and outcomes. If you are considering applying for a visa or are unsure about your situation, it’s best to seek advice from an Australian legal practitioner (Australian immigration lawyer).
Video Case Study: Partner Visa Double Grant (Even While Living Apart)
Before diving into the detailed breakdown, you can watch the real-life case study this article is based on. In this video, we dive into a real case study of a couple who faced this exact challenge. The sponsor was in Australia, the applicant in Indonesia. Despite a four-year commitment, they had spent significant time apart due to work and visa rules. We’ll show you the legal approach we took to successfully argue they met the ‘long-term relationship’ criteria, leading to a direct grant of the permanent Subclass 801 visa alongside the temporary Subclass 820.
The Client’s Story: A Cross-Continental Commitment
Our clients were a dedicated couple whose relationship spanned two countries.
Sponsor: 35-year-old Australian citizen
Applicant: 28-year-old Indonesian citizen
They had been together for four years and married for two. The sponsor met the applicant while travelling in Indonesia, and a genuine connection quickly formed. What began with daily video calls and messages soon blossomed into an exclusive and committed relationship. About a year in, they knew they wanted a future together.
Over the next year, the sponsor made extensive visits to Indonesia. He provided financial and emotional support, they began making shared plans, and they introduced each other to their respective circles of family and friends.
However, their plan to build a life together under one roof was delayed. Significant work commitments in their respective countries meant they had to maintain their long-distance relationship. While their desire to be together was unwavering, the practicalities of their situation, combined with visa limitations, kept them physically apart for extended periods.
Two years into their relationship, they solidified their commitment by getting married in Indonesia, with the sponsor’s family and friends flying in to celebrate with them. For the next year, the sponsor continued visiting the applicant as much as possible until the applicant was able to secure a multiple-entry visitor visa. This allowed them to spend more significant time together in Australia.
Approaching the four-year mark of their relationship, they were ready to make Australia their permanent home and decided to apply for an onshore partner visa (subclass 820).
(Many successful partner visa journeys, like our clients’, begin with years of commitment across distances, built through countless calls and messages.)
The Central Challenge: The “Long-Term Relationship” Hurdle
Based on our initial discussions, it was clear they had a strong and genuine relationship. The evidence of their commitment was abundant. However, the critical question was whether they could meet the strict legislative requirements for a double grant.
Under migration law, a “long-term relationship” is generally defined as one that has continued for:
At least three years; or
At least two years, and there is a dependent child of the relationship.
Our clients had been married for two years, but they had been together for four. The challenge was the period before their marriage. Could the time they spent in a committed but long-distance relationship count towards the three-year requirement?
The facts presented a complex picture:
They were together for four years, including two years of marriage.
They were exclusive and committed from early on.
The sponsor made numerous, lengthy visits throughout the four years.
Crucially, they had never lived together continuously due to work and visa restrictions.
(The success of an Australian partner visa can hinge on interpreting legal definitions like ‘de facto relationship’ and ‘living separately and apart,’ where nuances make all the difference.)
Our Approach: Building the Argument from a Deeper Understanding
The law assesses a spousal relationship from the date of marriage. For a de facto relationship, it looks at the combination of factors that demonstrate a shared life, such as financial interdependence, social recognition, the nature of the household, and the level of commitment.
Our consultation process involved a deep dive into the history of their relationship. We listened to their entire story, going beyond just dates and documents. It became clear that despite the distance, their lives were deeply intertwined long before they were married.
Our argument hinged on establishing that they were already in a de facto relationship for one year before their two-year marriage began.
We contended that from the start of their second year together, their relationship met the de facto criteria. They had declared their commitment to one another, the sponsor was providing support, they were recognised as a couple by their friends and families, and they were making significant life plans together. We argued that their periods of separation were temporary and involuntary, caused by external factors (work and visa restrictions) rather than a lack of commitment.
We meticulously gathered evidence to support this narrative, demonstrating that their marriage was the formalisation of a commitment that already existed. This allowed us to argue that they had a genuine and continuing relationship of at least three years (one year de facto + two years of marriage) by the time they lodged their application.
It was a nuanced argument that required careful legal submission, but the couple instructed us to proceed.
The Successful Outcome: A Direct Path to Permanent Residency
The result was a testament to their incredible story and the strength of the application. The Department of Home Affairs accepted our submissions.
Our clients received a “double grant”, their temporary subclass 820 and permanent subclass 801 partner visas were granted at the same time. They were thrilled to be able to move forward with their lives in Australia with certainty and peace of mind.
(The ultimate goal: our clients celebrating their future together in Australia after receiving a direct permanent residency grant, skipping the two-year wait.)
Key Takeaways from This Long-term Relationship Partner Visa Journey
Your Entire Relationship History Matters. Do not underestimate the value of the time you spent together before marriage or before you started living together. As this case shows, a strong, committed long-distance relationship can be recognised if the evidence is presented correctly.
“Living Together” is Not Always Black and White. While cohabitation is a strong indicator of a de facto relationship, the law allows for circumstances where couples may live apart temporarily. Proving this requires a detailed explanation and strong supporting evidence.
A Well-Prepared Application Tells a Story. Simply uploading documents is not enough. A successful application weaves those documents into a compelling narrative that addresses the legal criteria and leaves no doubt in the decision-maker’s mind about the genuineness of your relationship.
Navigating the subtleties of what constitutes a “de facto” or “long-term” relationship requires a deep understanding of immigration law and policy. If your situation has unique or complex elements, professional guidance can be invaluable.
With over 8 years of dedicated experience in Australian immigration law, our principal migration lawyer, Jay, has helped numerous couples translate their unique relationship stories into successful visa applications. If you are preparing a partner visa and want to ensure your case is presented in the best possible light, we are here to help.
(Navigating complex cases is about careful preparation and deep legal understanding. Our team is ready to listen to your story and help you plan your path forward.)
FAQ: Partner Visa Double Grant & Proving De Facto Relationship Living Apart
❓What exactly is a “double grant” for an Australian partner visa? A double grant, or dual grant, is when the Department of Home Affairs grants both the temporary partner visa (subclass 820 or 309) and the permanent partner visa (subclass 801 or 100) at the same time, for example, simultaneously providing subclass 820/801 visa grants. This means you become a permanent resident immediately and do not have to go through the second stage of the application process.
❓Is a double grant automatic if we have been married for over three years? Not necessarily. While being married for over three years is a strong foundation, the Department must still be satisfied that your relationship has been genuine and continuing to the exclusion of all others for that entire period. The burden of proof is always on the applicant to provide sufficient evidence covering the full length of the relationship.
❓We have been in a long-distance relationship for most of our three years together. Can we still argue it’s a “long-term relationship”? As our case study shows, it is possible. However, it is more challenging. You would need to provide extensive evidence to demonstrate that despite the distance, your lives were fully integrated as if you were living together. This includes showing high levels of financial and emotional support, frequent communication, time spent together during visits, and social recognition as a committed couple. This requires a deep understanding of your unique relationship circumstances.
❓What is the main difference between being married and being in a de facto relationship for visa purposes? A marriage is legally recognised with a marriage certificate, which provides a clear start date for the spousal relationship. A de facto relationship is not defined by a single document (unless there is a registration of relationship with a state or territory government). You must prove its existence by providing evidence across four key pillars: financial aspects, the nature of the household, social aspects, and the nature of your commitment. The start date of a de facto relationship is the date you can prove these factors came into existence.
❓How can we prove we were in a de facto relationship before we got married? You would need to gather evidence from the pre-marriage period that addresses the four pillars of a de facto relationship.
❓This seems complicated. Why is legal advice helpful for a case like this? The definition of “long-term relationship” and “de facto relationship” involves legal subtleties. An immigration lawyer can assess the specific details of your relationship history against the law and policy, identify potential weaknesses, and help you build a strategy to present the strongest possible case. For complex situations like long-distance relationships, professional guidance can make a meaningful difference in the outcome.
Because these cases are so complex and personal, a tailored assessment is crucial. If you are in a similar situation and wish to understand your position, you can reach out to our principal lawyer directly by emailing him at jays@flowmigrationlaw.com.au to book a consultation.
Jay Son is the Founder of Flow Migration Law and an Australian Immigration Lawyer with over 8 years of experience helping couples and families navigate the Australian partner visa and all family immigration processes. He works closely with each client to simplify the legal complexities and provide clear and strategic guidance tailored to their unique journey.
Jay is also a strong Migration Advocate and is highly experienced in challenging government decisions in relation to Australian immigration law, solving difficult migration matters and visa problems including the ART appeals, visa refusals, visa cancellations, Schedule 3 submissions, health waivers and character concerns.
