One of the most frequent questions raised on the program is precisely this situation: the earlier partner application was withdrawn or refused, the relationship has ended, and now a new life partner is ready to sponsor. Negin Safaei, Australian migration lawyer with MARA registration number 1791573, unpacks the precise legal framework behind this question here: which restrictions apply to the sponsor, which apply to the applicant, and what the real risk is where information does not line up with the earlier application. What follows is the same complete guidance she gives applicants in legal consultations.
The short answer
Yes. Australian migration law imposes no five-year waiting period on a Partner visa applicant who was previously sponsored by someone else and whose relationship has since ended. The five-year restriction and the cap of two sponsorships in reg 1.20J of the Migration Regulations 1994 relate solely to the sponsor’s history. The genuine issues in your case are these: consistency with the earlier application (PIC 4020), the section 48 bar if you were previously refused and hold no substantive visa, and independent proof of the new relationship.
What the law says
1) Reg 1.20J is a limitation on the approval of sponsorship, not a restriction on the applicant. Under reg 1.20J(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994, the Minister must not approve a partner or prospective marriage sponsorship unless satisfied that: (a) no more than one other person has previously been granted a visa as the spouse, de facto partner or fiancé(e) of that same sponsor; (b) if such a person has been granted a visa, less than five years have passed since the date that earlier application was lodged; and (c) if the sponsor themselves was previously granted a visa as another person’s partner, less than five years have passed since the lodgement date of that application.
The direction of this rule matters enormously: the clock runs from the date the earlier application was lodged, not from the date the visa was granted or the date of separation. More importantly, nothing in the Migration Regulations prevents an applicant whose earlier relationship has ended, or whose earlier partner application was refused or withdrawn, from being sponsored by a new partner for a period of five years. So if your new partner has no history of partner sponsorship and did not themselves obtain residence through a Partner visa, reg 1.20J presents no obstacle to your application.
2) Where reg 1.20J does apply, it is a mandatory legal bar. In that situation, revisiting and “tidying up” the earlier application is not the answer; the only avenue is the discretionary waiver in reg 1.20J(2), which requires “compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor”. That threshold has been given a narrow and demanding interpretation in the case law — including by the Full Court of the Federal Court in Babicci v MIMIA (2005) 141 FCR 285 — and does not extend to ordinary hardship or simply being apart. Sponsorships approved before reg 1.20J was introduced also count towards the cap.
3) The principal risk in your case has a precise name: public interest criterion PIC 4020 in Schedule 4. This criterion allows the Department of Home Affairs to refuse an application where the applicant, or a member of their family unit, has given a bogus document or information that is false or misleading “in a material particular”. The consequence is not merely refusal: a three-year non-grant period applies, and where the false information or bogus document relates to identity, that period is ten years. Two subtleties need to be understood: first, the “materiality” threshold must be met, so not every minor and inconsequential discrepancy is automatically fatal; second, information that is incomplete, inconsistent or omitted in a way that makes proper assessment impossible can also fall within the scope of this criterion. Good faith and an “innocent mistake” are not, on their own, a complete answer to PIC 4020.
4) If the earlier application was refused onshore and you now hold no substantive visa, section 48 of the Migration Act 1958 comes into play. Section 48 restricts the lodgement of certain visa applications from within Australia by a person who, since last entering, has had a visa refused or cancelled and who holds no substantive visa. Reg 2.12 sets out the subclasses that may nonetheless be lodged onshore despite that bar, and the Partner visa is one of those exceptions; in that case, however, the Schedule 3 criteria must be met, unless the Department of Home Affairs accepts that there are “compelling reasons” to waive them. Further, under s 48(3), leaving Australia and returning on a Bridging B visa does not reset the bar, because you are deemed to have remained continuously in Australia.
5) The new relationship must be proved independently, and the new sponsor must satisfy the character requirements. The new application is assessed against the relationship criteria — the definition of de facto partner in reg 1.09A (including the twelve-month cohabitation requirement, unless the relationship is registered or an exception is accepted) and the assessment of “all of the circumstances of the relationship” under reg 1.15A; the history of the earlier application is no substitute for that evidence. On the sponsor’s side, regs 1.20KB and 1.20KC impose restrictions relating to criminal history and require the provision of police certificates; reg 1.20KB, for example, prohibits sponsorship by a person charged with or convicted of registrable child sex offences or comparably serious offences where there is an applicant under 18 years of age.
A precise map of the requirements: what applies to the sponsor and what applies to you
| Issue | Legal basis | Applies to | Key point |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lifetime cap of two partner sponsorships | reg 1.20J(1)(a) | Sponsor | Historical sponsorships — even those predating this regulation — are counted. |
| Five-year interval since the previous sponsorship | reg 1.20J(1)(b) | Sponsor | The five years run from the lodgement date of the earlier application, not the date of grant. |
| Five-year interval for a person who themselves came on a Partner visa | reg 1.20J(1)(c) | Sponsor | Five years from the lodgement date of the sponsor’s own application. |
| Waiver of the above restrictions | reg 1.20J(2) | Sponsor | Only with “compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor”; narrowly construed (Babicci, 2005). |
| Waiting period for an applicant previously sponsored | — | — | No such waiting period exists in the Migration Regulations. |
| False or misleading information, or a bogus document | PIC 4020, Schedule 4 | Applicant and members of the family unit | Refusal + 3-year non-grant period; 10 years in identity-related cases. |
| Bar on onshore lodgement after an earlier refusal | s 48 Migration Act 1958 + reg 2.12 | Applicant | The Partner visa is an exception; departing and returning on a Bridging B does not reset it (s 48(3)). |
| Schedule 3 requirement where there is no substantive visa | Schedule 3, Migration Regulations 1994 | Applicant | Must be satisfied, unless “compelling reasons” for a waiver are accepted. |
| Proving the new relationship | regs 1.09A and 1.15A | Both | 12 months of cohabitation for a de facto relationship, unless the relationship is registered or an exception applies. |
| Sponsor character requirements and police certificates | regs 1.20KB and 1.20KC | Sponsor | In certain cases, an absolute bar to sponsorship. |
What this means for you
The good news — and the legally accurate news — is that the end of a relationship does not “burn” you under Australian migration law. As Negin Safaei puts it, what makes or breaks a second partner application is not the date you separated; it is three things: your new sponsor’s history (which must be tested against reg 1.20J), the consistency of your account and documents with the earlier application (which must be reviewed before lodgement against the materiality threshold in PIC 4020), and your current visa status (which determines whether section 48 and Schedule 3 come into play at all).
In practical terms: before the new application is lodged, the lodgement date of the earlier application, the identity of the former sponsor, the outcome of that application (refusal, withdrawal or grant) and every statement you made in it must all be on the table. And if details in the earlier application — such as the commencement date of the relationship, the address of cohabitation, or marital status — do not sit comfortably with the account you are giving today, the explanation must go into the file before the Department of Home Affairs asks, documented and transparent, rather than in response to a natural justice letter. Likewise, if your new partner obtained residence through a Partner visa themselves, or has previously sponsored someone, their five-year timeline — running from the lodgement date of that application — is the starting point for your planning.
This is exactly where Negin Safaei’s experience as a MARA-registered migration lawyer (registration number 1791573) proves its worth: a legal review of the earlier application, a precise determination of which statutory bars genuinely apply to you and which are simply misinformation you have heard, and the construction of a new application that proves your present relationship independently, coherently and on the evidence. A second application is not necessarily a weaker one — it is a more carefully built one.
Sources
- Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) — reg 1.20J (limitation on approval of sponsorship), reg 1.20KB, reg 1.20KC, reg 1.09A, reg 1.15A, reg 2.12, Schedule 3, Schedule 4 (PIC 4020) — legislation.gov.au (current compilation)
- Migration Act 1958 (Cth) — s 48, s 48(3) — legislation.gov.au (current compilation)
- Migration Regulations 1994 — registration page and version history — Federal Register of Legislation
- Partner visa (Temporary) subclass 820 / (Permanent) subclass 801 — conditions and requirements — Department of Home Affairs
- Partner visa (Provisional) subclass 309 / (Migrant) subclass 100 — Department of Home Affairs
- Sponsoring a partner — sponsor requirements — Department of Home Affairs
- Babicci v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2005) 141 FCR 285 (Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia) — interpretation of “compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor”
- Office of the Migration Agents Registration Authority (OMARA) — registration and verification of migration agents — mara.gov.au
Let’s read your earlier application together, before you open a new one
If you are in a new relationship and you are unsure how the history of your earlier partner application affects it, this is not a question to answer on guesswork and hearsay. In a legal consultation with Negin Safaei, MARA-registered migration lawyer (1791573), we put the lodgement date of the earlier application, your new sponsor’s history, your current visa status and every statement previously made side by side, so you know exactly which statutory bars apply to you, what evidence you need, and from what date you can proceed with confidence. Gather the documents and dates from your earlier application and call our office to arrange a consultation — transparency today is the best protection for your application tomorrow.
Frequently asked questions
Do I have to wait five years after my earlier partner application before my new partner can sponsor me?
No. The five-year restriction in reg 1.20J of the Migration Regulations 1994 applies to the sponsor’s history, not to an applicant who was previously sponsored. If your new partner has not previously sponsored anyone as a partner and did not obtain residence through a Partner visa themselves, there is no waiting period for you.
From what date are the five years under reg 1.20J counted?
From the date the earlier Partner visa application was lodged — not from the date the visa was granted, nor from the date of marriage, nor from the date of separation. This is expressly stated in paragraphs (b) and (c) of reg 1.20J(1).
If my new sponsor is caught by the reg 1.20J restriction, is there any way forward?
Yes, but it is a narrow one: the discretionary waiver in reg 1.20J(2), which requires proof of “compelling circumstances affecting the sponsor”. That threshold is narrowly construed in the case law, including by the Full Court of the Federal Court in Babicci v MIMIA (2005) 141 FCR 285, and is not met by ordinary hardship.
What happens if details in my new application differ from the earlier one?
The principal risk is PIC 4020 in Schedule 4: giving a bogus document or false or misleading information in a material particular can lead to refusal and a three-year non-grant period; in identity-related cases that period is ten years. Not every minor, inconsequential discrepancy is automatically fatal, but incomplete or inconsistent information that makes proper assessment impossible can fall within this criterion.
My earlier application was refused onshore and I hold no substantive visa — can I still apply from within Australia?
Section 48 of the Migration Act 1958 restricts onshore lodgement, but reg 2.12 makes the Partner visa one of the exceptions. In that case the Schedule 3 criteria must be satisfied, unless “compelling reasons” for a waiver are accepted.
Does leaving Australia on a Bridging B visa lift the section 48 bar?
No. Under s 48(3) of the Migration Act 1958, you are deemed to have remained continuously in Australia, and a trip overseas on a Bridging B does not reset the bar.
Can documents from my earlier partner application be used for the new one?
No; the new relationship must be proved independently under regs 1.09A and 1.15A, including the twelve-month cohabitation requirement for a de facto relationship unless the relationship is registered or an exception is accepted. The history of the earlier application is no substitute for evidence of your current relationship.
Does the new sponsor also have to meet character requirements?
Yes. Regs 1.20KB and 1.20KC of the Migration Regulations 1994 provide for police certificates and restrictions relating to criminal history on the part of the sponsor; reg 1.20KB, for example, prohibits sponsorship by a person charged with or convicted of registrable child sex offences or comparably serious offences where there is an applicant under 18 years of age in the application.
This answer reflects the law and policy as verified on September 29, 2026. Immigration rules change frequently — confirm the current position before acting.
Mrs. Negin Safaee Registered Migration Agent 1791573
This article is general information only, current at the date shown, and is not legal advice. Do not rely on it for your own situation — immigration law and policy change frequently. Seek advice from a registered migration agent or immigration lawyer about your circumstances.