One of the questions I am asked most often is whether starting a relationship through Instagram, Telegram, a dating app or video calls makes a partner application look “weak” in the eyes of a case officer. The answer is clear, and it rests on the text of the law — not on the assumptions that circulate in Persian-language social media.
In this article, Negin Safaei, Australian migration lawyer and registered migration agent (MARN 1791573), explains precisely what Australian migration law does assess, what it does not assess, and where the legal line sits between a “legal requirement” and “supporting evidence”.
The short answer
No. There is nothing in Australian migration law that rejects or restricts the way a couple met — online or face to face. Under Regulation 1.15A of the Migration Regulations 1994, the case officer assesses four areas: the financial aspects of the relationship, the nature of the household, the social aspects, and the nature of the parties’ commitment to each other. That said, for the Prospective Marriage visa (subclass 300), meeting in person and knowing each other personally is an express legal requirement, and for the de facto stream the general rule is that the de facto relationship must have existed for 12 months before the application is lodged. So a relationship that has never moved beyond the online phase will not, in practice, meet the criteria.
What the law says
The legal structure of the Partner visa rests on two layers: the statutory definitions in the Migration Act 1958 and the assessment criteria in the Migration Regulations 1994.
- Section 5F of the Migration Act 1958 (spouse) and section 5CB (de facto partner): the parties must have a mutual commitment to a shared life together to the exclusion of all others, the relationship must be genuine and continuing, and they must live together or not live separately and apart on a permanent basis.
- Regulation 1.15A of the Migration Regulations 1994: in reaching a decision, the Minister (and, on the Minister’s behalf, the case officer) must consider “all of the circumstances of the relationship”, including the matters set out in subregulation (3) — the financial aspects (such as the pooling of financial resources, any legal obligations one party owes the other, and the basis on which day-to-day household expenses are shared), the nature of the household, the social aspects, and the nature of the parties’ commitment to each other.
- The general Partner visa criteria are those published by the Department of Home Affairs: a genuine and continuing relationship, mutual commitment, not living separately and apart on a permanent basis, the applicant being 18 years of age or older, and the parties not being related by family. For the married stream, the marriage must be valid under Australian law.
None of these provisions refers to where or on what platform the couple met. Meeting online is therefore neither a legal barrier nor a ground for refusal in itself.
One precise legal point deserves to be stated plainly: the “relationship story”, or so-called Love Story, is not a legal requirement. The statement about the history of the relationship — which applicants are asked to provide in the Department of Home Affairs guidance to Form 1496i — is simply one piece of evidence alongside the rest. The legal requirement is that the elements of ss 5F/5CB and the factors in Regulation 1.15A(3) are made out; the relationship statement is a tool for proving that, not an independent criterion.
On the question of meeting in person, two visa groups must be distinguished. For subclasses 820/801 (onshore) and 309/100 (offshore), “met in person” is not an express legal criterion; its value is evidentiary. By contrast, for the Prospective Marriage visa (subclass 300), clause 300.214(2) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations expressly requires that the parties have met in person and are known to each other personally, and clause 300.215(b) requires a genuine intention to marry. A relationship that has never progressed to an in-person meeting therefore cannot succeed under subclass 300.
As for money and gifts sent by the sponsor, the legal reality is the same: these matters are merely indicative evidence under the “financial aspects” heading in Regulation 1.15A(3)(a). There is no legal obligation on a sponsor to send money to the applicant before the application is lodged, and the absence of such payments is not, on its own, a reason for refusal.
And on the statistic that is sometimes repeated in Persian-language forums: the Department of Home Affairs does not publish a dedicated “refusal rate” for Partner visas. The published migration program statistics count the Partner program outcome on the basis of visas granted; refused or withdrawn applications are not captured in that count — a point noted in the report of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO, Report No. 16 of 2022–23 on the management of Partner visa processing). The accurate and defensible statement is this: a partner application is highly sensitive to the quality, coherence and consistency of the evidence.
Key criteria: what is a legal requirement and what is evidence
| Issue | Legal status | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| How the couple met (online / in person / family introduction) | No requirement or restriction | No such criterion exists in the Act or the Regulations |
| A genuine and continuing relationship + mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others | Legal requirement | ss 5F / 5CB, Migration Act 1958; Department of Home Affairs criteria |
| Assessment of four areas: financial, household, social, nature of commitment | Mandatory assessment criterion | reg 1.15A(3), Migration Regulations 1994 |
| Relationship statement / “Love Story” | Supporting evidence, not a visa requirement | Form 1496i guidance; reg 1.15A |
| Meeting in person for 820/801 and 309/100 | Not an express legal criterion; high evidentiary value | Schedule 2, criteria for the relevant subclasses |
| Meeting in person and knowing each other personally for subclass 300 | Express legal requirement | cl 300.214(2); intention to marry: cl 300.215(b) |
| 12 months of de facto relationship before lodgement | General rule in the de facto stream, subject to exceptions (including registration of the relationship with a State/Territory registry) | s 5CB Migration Act 1958 and the related Regulations; relationship registration: BDM Victoria |
| Money or gifts sent by the sponsor before lodgement | Not a legal obligation; indicative evidence only | reg 1.15A(3)(a) |
| Applicant aged 18 or over and the parties not being related by family | Legal requirement | Partner visa criteria, Department of Home Affairs |
What this means for you
If your relationship began with a message on Instagram or a long conversation on Telegram, take a breath: no case officer will refuse your application for that reason. What matters is whether the relationship has moved from the online phase into a genuine and continuing shared life, and whether your evidence tells that story coherently and without contradictions.
In Negin Safaei’s experience, doing this properly involves three steps. First, choosing the correct subclass: if no in-person meeting has taken place, subclass 300 is not a viable option because of the requirement in clause 300.214(2), and the pathway must be redesigned. Second, establishing the legal foundation of the relationship: in the de facto stream you must either demonstrate 12 months of de facto relationship before lodgement or rely on formal registration of the relationship (for example with Births, Deaths and Marriages Victoria); in the married stream, the validity of the marriage is assessed under Australian law. Third, building the evidentiary case around the four areas in Regulation 1.15A(3) — not around a beautiful love story, but around the financial aspects, the household, the social aspects and the nature of the commitment. Chat logs, video calls and travel tickets each sit under one of those four headings, and that is where they draw their weight from.
You should also clear two misconceptions from your mind: that “the sponsor must send money before you apply”, and that “Partner visas have an extremely high refusal rate”. Neither has any legal basis or official statistical support. What is true is that this visa is highly sensitive to the quality of the evidence and the consistency of both parties’ accounts — and that is precisely where a registered migration agent (MARA), working directly from the text of the Regulations and current Department of Home Affairs practice, makes the difference.
Sources
- Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) — reg 1.15A “Spouse” and Schedule 2 (clauses 300.214, 300.215) — Federal Register of Legislation: https://www.legislation.gov.au/F1996B00539/latest/text
- Migration Act 1958 (Cth) — ss 5F (spouse) and 5CB (de facto partner) — Federal Register of Legislation: https://www.legislation.gov.au/C1958A00062/latest/text
- Partner visa (Temporary) subclass 820 and Partner visa (Permanent) subclass 801 — Department of Home Affairs: https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/partner-onshore/temporary-820-801
- Partner visa (Provisional) subclass 309 and (Migrant) subclass 100 — Department of Home Affairs: https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/partner-offshore/provisional-309-migrant-100
- Prospective Marriage visa (subclass 300) — Department of Home Affairs: https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/prospective-marriage-300
- Form 1496i — Applying for a Partner visa (guidance on the relationship history and supporting documents) — Department of Home Affairs: https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/form-listing/forms/1496i.pdf
- Visa statistics — Department of Home Affairs: https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/what-we-do/statistics
- Auditor-General Report No. 16 of 2022–23, “Management of Partner Visa Processing” — Australian National Audit Office: https://www.anao.gov.au/work/performance-audit/management-partner-visa-processing
- Register a relationship — Births, Deaths and Marriages Victoria: https://www.bdm.vic.gov.au/relationships/register-a-relationship
- Register of Migration Agents (to verify a MARA registration number) — Office of the Migration Agents Registration Authority: https://www.mara.gov.au/search-the-register-of-migration-agents
Did your relationship start with a single message? Let your application start with a precise legal roadmap
Every relationship that began online has its own unique details: the date of the first in-person meeting, how long you have lived together, whether you are married or have registered your relationship, and the kinds of evidence you already hold. Those details are exactly what determine whether your pathway is 820/801, 309/100 or subclass 300. In a dedicated consultation, Negin Safaei, Australian migration lawyer and registered migration agent (MARN 1791573), will measure your circumstances against the text of the Regulations, map out the four Regulation 1.15A areas for your specific case, and tell you which documents to start building today and which to set aside. Request a consultation for advice tailored to your situation — an application that is structured correctly from the outset buys you peace of mind for the whole journey.
Frequently asked questions
Will meeting online cause an Australian Partner visa to be refused?
No. Neither the Migration Act 1958 nor the Migration Regulations 1994 contains any criterion restricting how a couple met. The assessment is made under Regulation 1.15A(3) across four areas: financial aspects, the nature of the household, social aspects and the nature of the commitment. What matters is a genuine and continuing relationship supported by coherent evidence — not the platform on which you met.
If we have never met in person, can we still apply?
Not for the Prospective Marriage visa (subclass 300): clause 300.214(2) expressly requires that the parties have met in person and are known to each other personally. For 820/801 and 309/100, “met in person” is not an express legal criterion, but without an in-person meeting it is practically impossible to establish a shared life, or a valid marriage, and a continuing relationship.
Is writing a “Love Story” mandatory for a Partner visa?
The relationship story is not a stand-alone legal requirement; the statement of relationship history requested in the Form 1496i guidance is one item of evidence. The legal requirement is that the elements of ss 5F/5CB and the factors in Regulation 1.15A(3) are satisfied, and the decision-maker must consider all of the circumstances of the relationship.
Does the sponsor need to send money or gifts before the application is lodged?
No. Sending money and gifts is only indicative evidence under the “financial aspects” heading in Regulation 1.15A(3)(a), alongside matters such as the pooling of financial resources and the basis on which day-to-day expenses are shared. There is no legal obligation to make any payment before applying, and its absence alone is not a ground for refusal.
For a de facto relationship that began online, how is the 12-month requirement met?
In the de facto stream, the general rule is that the de facto relationship must have existed for 12 months before the application is lodged (subject to exceptions, such as formal registration of the relationship with a State or Territory registry, for example BDM Victoria). A relationship that has never moved beyond the online phase will not, in practice, satisfy this requirement.
Is the Partner visa refusal rate really very high?
The Department of Home Affairs does not publish a dedicated refusal rate for Partner visas, and the Partner program outcome in the official statistics is counted on the basis of visas granted; refused or withdrawn applications are not included. The accurate description is that this visa is highly sensitive to the quality and coherence of the evidence.
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.