A phone call or an interview is possible in partner cases and sits entirely within the case officer’s discretion (sections 56, 58 and 59 of the Migration Act), but it is not a standard step in the process. Most partner applications are decided on the documents, and an interview usually only arises where some doubt exists about the genuineness of the relationship or about the claims made in the application.
Negin Safaei, an Australian migration lawyer registered with MARA under number 1791573, regards this as one of the most common concerns raised by couples, and she explains the legal framework plainly: the law permits the decision-maker to obtain any information considered relevant and to invite the applicant, orally or in writing, to provide further information; the response, too, may be sought in writing, by telephone, or by way of an interview. Under section 59, the applicant must take all reasonable steps to be available for and to attend an interview, and an in-person interview is not mandatory — a telephone interview may well suffice.
What circulates publicly about “an officer calling the sponsor and the applicant at the same time” is not published Department of Home Affairs procedure. No such thing appears in official policy, and what is reported in practice is separate calls — sometimes only a short time apart. Negin Safaei emphasises that these accounts should be treated as anecdotal experience rather than formal procedure, and that this very distinction is what separates informed preparation from needless anxiety.
The reassuring point is that any interview falls under the umbrella of the Code of Procedure. Section 57 obliges the Department to put certain adverse information to the applicant for comment before relying on it, and section 58 provides that an invitation to give information must specify the manner in which, and the period within which, the response is to be given. In practice, an applicant may also ask the officer to reschedule the interview, to communicate through their appointed migration representative, or to provide an interpreter — these are reasonable requests rather than rights set out in published policy, and that simple request is usually enough to lift the pressure of the moment.
Accounts of “home visits and questioning the neighbours” also call for precision: no published document from the Department of Home Affairs, nothing in the Migration Act, and nothing from MARA presents this as part of the ordinary processing of a partner visa. Officers cannot enter private residential premises without the occupant’s consent or lawful authority, and the statutory power to “enter premises for visa monitoring purposes” is framed around the premises of education providers, not the homes of partner couples. Field visits arise in the context of non-compliance and fraud investigations, and should be seen as exceptional and unsupported by published policy rather than a common experience.
Negin Safaei’s practical advice is straightforward: build your application so thoroughly documented and so internally consistent that any call, if it comes, simply confirms the reality of your life together, and make sure your answers align with what is already on the file.
If you would like to face any call or interview calmly and fully prepared, book a consultation with Negin Safaei for a tailored review of your partner visa application.
Read the full legal breakdown ←
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.