Schedule 3 Partner Visa: Legal Help Without a Substantive Visa
Assessing Schedule 3 criteria and any available waiver in an onshore partner visa matter.
Information checked 9 October 2026
For a subclass 820 applicant without a substantive visa, the ordinary pathway under clause 820.211(2)(d) of the Migration Regulations 1994 requires Schedule 3 criteria 3001, 3003 and 3004 to be satisfied unless the Minister is satisfied that there are compelling reasons for not applying them. Special categories have different requirements. Check your visa grant, expiry, entry and decision records before lodging: Schedule 3 grant criteria are separate from section 48 application restrictions and condition 8503 no-further-stay restrictions under the Migration Act 1958 and Migration Regulations 1994.
Three separate checks before an onshore partner visa application
| Legal issue | What it controls | What to check first | What it does not establish |
|---|---|---|---|
| Schedule 3 criteria | Grant requirements through the applicable subclass 820 provision. | Application-date status, the applicable category, criteria 3001, 3003 and 3004, and evidence of compelling reasons. | A valid application does not prove that grant criteria are met. |
| Section 48 restriction | Further applications after specified refusals or cancellations in the migration zone without a substantive visa. | Decision records, the prescribed visa class and Schedule 1 validity requirements. | The partner-class exception does not remove Schedule 3 or other validity restrictions. |
| Condition 8503 | A no-further-stay restriction affecting further onshore applications. | The grant notice or VEVO record, statutory restrictions and the available condition-waiver process. | Requesting a waiver does not waive the condition, extend stay or grant a bridging visa. |
These distinctions follow clause 820.211(2)(d) of the Migration Regulations 1994, section 48 of the Migration Act 1958, regulation 2.12 of the Migration Regulations 1994, and the Department of Home Affairs’ No Further Stay waiver guidance.
A bridging visa is not a substantive visa under section 5 of the Migration Act 1958, so lawful stay on a bridging visa does not by itself remove a Schedule 3 issue. Marriage, having a child or experiencing hardship does not automatically establish compelling reasons under clause 820.211(2)(d) of the Migration Regulations 1994. An Australian migration lawyer can identify the applicable provisions, organise the visa chronology and prepare evidence addressing the reasons relied on.
Request Partner Visa Legal Help to seek an assessment of your visa history and proposed onshore application. This website is an information guide, not a law practice; submitting an enquiry does not appoint a lawyer or lodge a visa application.
Before the next step
- Separate application validity from Schedule 3 grant criteria.
- Build a dated chronology from original visa and decision records.
- Support the reasons relied on with relevant, truthful evidence.
On this page
When does Schedule 3 apply?
Schedule 3 applies through the relevant subclass 820 criterion, not simply because a person is applying for a partner visa, under clause 820.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994.
| Position when applying | Schedule 3 assessment | Records needed |
|---|---|---|
| Holding a substantive visa | Check the applicable subclass 820 category; the ordinary non-substantive requirement is not triggered merely by applying. | Visa grant, conditions and current status record. |
| Holding only a bridging visa | Assess the applicable non-substantive pathway. | Bridging visa commencement details and preceding visa history. |
| No visa in effect | Assess Schedule 3, application validity and unlawful status separately. | Entry, visa cessation and decision records. |
| Potential special category | Check the category’s precise requirements. | Diplomatic/SOFA or subclass 300 records, as relevant. |
Is a bridging visa a substantive visa?
No. Section 5 of the Migration Act 1958 excludes bridging visas from that definition.
A bridging visa can authorise lawful stay without removing the need to assess the non-substantive pathway under the Migration Act 1958 and clause 820.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994.
Do special categories change the assessment?
Yes. Clause 820.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994 provides a separate route involving criterion 3002 for specified diplomatic/SOFA entry circumstances, and other routes for qualifying current or former subclass 300 holders.
An Australian migration lawyer should match your records to the exact provision. Having held a particular visa does not, by itself, establish eligibility under a special category.
Which criteria need to be addressed?
The ordinary non-substantive pathway requires criteria 3001, 3003 and 3004 unless the Minister is satisfied that there are compelling reasons for not applying them, under clause 820.211(2)(d) of the Migration Regulations 1994. The requirements within criteria 3003 and 3004 depend on the applicant’s status and history.
| Criterion | What it requires | Practical assessment |
|---|---|---|
| 3001 | The application must be validly made within 28 days after the legally defined “relevant day”. Its definition includes different rules for older entry-permit histories, visa cessation, unlawful entry and specified ART cancellation decisions. | Establish the relevant day from the statutory definition and original records; do not automatically use the visa expiry date. |
| 3003 | Its additional requirements apply if the applicant has not held a substantive visa on or after 1 September 1994 and, on 31 August 1994, was an illegal entrant or held an entry permit not valid beyond that date. The Minister must be satisfied that the loss of lawful/substantive status arose from factors beyond the applicant’s control; there are compelling reasons to grant the visa; the applicant substantially complied with the last entry permit and subsequent bridging visa conditions; the applicant would have qualified for an equivalent entry permit at the specified historical date; and the applicant intends to comply with future visa conditions. The last entry permit, if any, must not have carried the specified restriction on further onshore entry permits. | First establish whether this historical category applies. If it does, address each requirement. The substantial-compliance test excludes a breach caused solely by the entry permit’s expiry. The historical eligibility date is immediately before last becoming an illegal entrant, or 31 August 1994 for the specified entry-permit holder. |
| 3004 | Its additional requirements apply if the applicant ceased to hold a substantive or criminal justice visa on or after 1 September 1994, or entered unlawfully on or after that date without subsequently being granted a substantive visa. The Minister must be satisfied that the absence of a substantive visa is due to factors beyond the applicant’s control; there are compelling reasons to grant the visa; relevant previous visa or entry-permit conditions and subsequent bridging visa conditions were substantially complied with; the applicant met the applicable historical eligibility test; and the applicant intends to comply with future visa conditions. If the last visa was a transitional temporary visa, it must not have carried the specified restriction on further onshore entry permits. | For the visa-cessation category, assess entitlement to the visa class on the last day the applicant held a substantive or criminal justice visa. For the unlawful-entry category, assess the grant criteria other than Schedule 3 on the last unlawful-entry date. Apply the relevant compliance branch; a breach caused solely by entry-permit expiry or a substantive visa ceasing is excluded. |
These requirements are set out in Schedule 3 of the Migration Regulations 1994, as checked on 9 October 2026. Meeting criterion 3001 alone does not establish compliance with the other applicable requirements.
What does the 28-day rule mean?
Criterion 3001 of the Migration Regulations 1994 concerns valid visa lodgement, not a general Department-response or review deadline. Build the chronology as: relevant event → legally defined relevant day → valid lodgement date. The remaining criteria and any request not to apply them still need separate assessment.
What supports a request not to apply Schedule 3 criteria?
A request needs evidence addressing compelling reasons under clause 820.211(2)(d) of the Migration Regulations 1994; no document or relationship event automatically establishes those reasons. “Schedule 3 waiver” is shorthand for this discretion, not a condition 8503 waiver.
| Evidence category | Records to consider | What to explain |
|---|---|---|
| Visa and entry chronology | Grants, entry records, visa cessation and decisions. | How the applicant’s present status arose. |
| Reasons relied on | Dated correspondence or relevant medical records. | The events, their timing and their effects. |
| Applicant and partner circumstances | Care, dependency, household or financial records. | Concrete consequences for the people affected. |
| Children or dependants | Identity, care and relevant professional records. | Each person’s individual circumstances. |
| Relationship evidence | Financial, household, social and commitment records. | The separate relationship requirements. |
| Explanation and corroboration | A chronology cross-referenced to supporting records. | The reasons relied on, including any gaps or inconsistencies. |
These are preparation categories, not a mandatory checklist. Include records relevant to your actual circumstances rather than trying to supply every type of document.
Do marriage, children or hardship guarantee an exception?
No. Clause 820.211(2)(d) of the Migration Regulations 1994 requires the Minister to be satisfied that there are compelling reasons for not applying the criteria. Individual evidence must support the request.
Should later circumstances be included?
Give the lawyer a dated account of relevant developments before and after lodgement, with supporting records where available, so the legally relevant circumstances can be identified.
How is Schedule 3 different from section 48 and condition 8503?
Schedule 3, section 48 and condition 8503 require separate assessment under the Migration Act 1958, the Migration Regulations 1994 and the Department of Home Affairs’ No Further Stay waiver guidance. Resolving one does not settle the others.
| Question | Schedule 3 | Section 48 | Condition 8503 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grant or application issue? | Grant criteria. | Further-application restriction. | No-further-stay restriction, with associated application-validity consequences. |
| What needs checking? | The applicable category, criteria and discretion. | Status, decisions, prescribed visa class and Schedule 1 requirements. | The actual condition, section 46 and the condition-waiver test. |
| Is identifying a partner pathway enough? | No. | No. | No. |
| Does resolving it settle other issues? | No. | No. | No. |
Does section 48 remove Schedule 3?
No. Section 48 of the Migration Act 1958, together with regulation 2.12 and Schedule 1 item 1124B of the Migration Regulations 1994, requires a separate application-validity assessment. The prescribed partner classes do not remove Schedule 3 requirements. The Department of Home Affairs’ subclass 820 guidance also identifies special section 48 statutory declarations, which are separate from Form 888.
Does a condition 8503 waiver settle Schedule 3?
No. Regulation 2.05(4) of the Migration Regulations 1994 concerns compelling and compassionate circumstances that developed since visa grant, were beyond the person’s control and resulted in a major change to their circumstances. That is not the Schedule 3 test. The Department of Home Affairs’ No Further Stay waiver guidance confirms that requesting a waiver does not extend stay or grant a bridging visa.
What should a lawyer review before lodgement?
Ask an Australian migration lawyer to work through these checks before deciding whether and how to lodge:
- Establish current status: review the passport, visa grants, conditions, VEVO record and bridging visa commencement details.
- Reconstruct the visa chronology: check entries, applications, grants, visa cessation and decisions against original notices.
- Assess application validity: consider section 48, no-further-stay restrictions and Schedule 1 requirements separately.
- Identify the grant criteria: determine the applicable subclass 820 category and Schedule 3 requirements.
- Prepare the explanation: organise truthful, dated evidence addressing the reasons relied on, gaps and inconsistencies.
- Assess the remaining requirements and status implications: review relationship evidence, sponsorship, other criteria and the proposed lodgement’s effect on actual visa status.
The Department of Home Affairs’ subclass 820 guidance separates applicant and sponsor requirements: the applicant seeks the visa, while the sponsor supplies the sponsorship material. A lawyer advises and prepares within the agreed engagement; the visa decision remains with the Department through the relevant statutory decision-maker under the Migration Act 1958 and Migration Regulations 1994.
What should the initial enquiry include?
- Your current visa type, if known.
- Your last substantive visa and when it ceased.
- The date of any refusal or cancellation notice.
- Any no-further-stay condition.
- Whether a partner visa application has already been lodged.
Describe missing information honestly. Do not attach passports, medical files or full relationship records to a general enquiry; first confirm who will receive them and how they should be provided securely.
What affects the lawyer’s quotation?
Request a written quotation in A$ for clearly defined work. Ask whether it covers the visa-history review, application-validity issues, Schedule 3 analysis, supporting evidence, preparation, lodgement and any later Department responses.
Keep lawyer fees, government charges and third-party expenses separate.
Discuss your onshore partner visa application
An Australian migration lawyer can assess the separate validity and grant requirements, identify the relevant Schedule 3 provisions and prepare a reasoned submission supported by your records. This helps ensure that the application addresses the applicable legal tests; it cannot guarantee a visa grant.
For broader preparation and lodgement information, read the Partner Visa Application guide.
If a decision has already been issued, the Partner Visa Refused guide explains the next assessment task. The Administrative Review Tribunal’s immigration guidance explains Tribunal review; availability and deadlines depend on the decision letter, notification and status. Tribunal review is distinct from court review.
Return to Partner Visa Lawyer Australia to find information for your current stage.
Request Partner Visa Legal Help to seek a case-specific assessment and an A$ quotation for the work required.