Family Violence Provisions on a Partner Visa: What the Regulations Actually Provide

What the provisions actually allow

A partner visa normally requires the relationship to be genuine and continuing at the time of decision. Family violence is a specific, named exception to that requirement, built into Schedule 2 for each stage of the partner visa: clause 820.221(3) for the onshore temporary visa, clause 309.221(3) for the offshore temporary visa, clause 801.221(6) for the onshore permanent visa, and clause 100.221(4) for the offshore permanent visa. Each of these clauses lets the visa be granted despite the relationship having ceased, where the applicant — or a family member — has experienced family violence committed by the sponsoring partner.

For the offshore pathway specifically, clause 309.221(3)(b)(i) adds a condition worth naming precisely: the applicant must have entered Australia after making the application for the family violence limb to apply. The offshore clause is otherwise built the same way as the onshore one.

These clauses sit alongside, and are separate from, the child-of-the-relationship and sponsor-death grounds in the same subclauses — covered in a companion article, linked below, because they raise no family violence question at all.

The definition: what "relevant family violence" means in the Regulations' own words

Regulation 1.21 defines relevant family violence as conduct, whether actual or threatened, towards any of: the alleged victim; a member of the alleged victim's family unit; a member of the alleged perpetrator's family unit; the property of the alleged victim; the property of a member of the alleged victim's family unit; or the property of a member of the alleged perpetrator's family unit — that causes the alleged victim to reasonably fear for, or to be reasonably apprehensive about, their own wellbeing or safety.

Three things follow directly from that wording. First, it is not limited to physical acts against the applicant personally — conduct towards a family member, or towards property, can qualify, provided it produces the required fear or apprehension in the alleged victim. Second, "violence" is itself defined in the same regulation to include a threat of violence, not only a completed act. Third, the test is the alleged victim's own reasonable fear or apprehension, not a requirement that any particular type of harm actually occurred.

The Regulations use the terms "alleged victim" and "alleged perpetrator" throughout Division 1.5, and that is deliberate — it is the terminology the Department itself uses while a claim is being assessed, before any finding is made.

Two ways family violence is established: judicial and non-judicial

Regulation 1.23 sets out, in order, three ways a person is taken to have experienced family violence on the strength of a court's own action — the judicial route — and a separate, fully non-judicial route.

The judicial routes are: an injunction granted under paragraph 114(1)(a), (b) or (c) of the Family Law Act 1975, on the application of the alleged victim, against the alleged perpetrator; a protection order made by a court under a State or Territory law for the protection of the alleged victim, made after the alleged perpetrator had an opportunity to be heard or to make submissions; or a conviction, or a recorded finding of guilt, against the alleged perpetrator for an offence of violence against the alleged victim.

In each case, the Regulations add a timing condition, discussed in full further down this page: the violence, or part of it, that led to the injunction, order or conviction must have occurred while the relevant relationship existed.

Where none of those three has happened — no injunction, no protection order, no conviction — regulation 1.23(8) and (9) defines a non-judicially determined claim of family violence. This is the route most people who have not gone through a court process will use, and it is the one the rest of this page covers in detail.

The non-judicial route: what regulation 1.23 actually requires

For a non-judicially determined claim, regulation 1.23(9) requires that the alleged victim is the spouse, de facto partner, or prospective spouse of the alleged perpetrator (or falls into one of a small number of related-dependant categories), and that the alleged victim, or someone acting on their behalf, has presented evidence in accordance with regulation 1.24 that the alleged victim experienced relevant family violence and that the alleged perpetrator committed it.

Worth noting precisely: the definition of relevant family violence in regulation 1.21 is framed around a relationship between the alleged perpetrator and their "spouse or de facto partner" or their "prospective spouse" — language that on its face extends to a Prospective Marriage (subclass 300) relationship, not only a married or de facto one.

When a non-judicial claim is made, regulation 1.23(10) sets out what the Minister must then do: consider whether the alleged victim has experienced relevant family violence; if satisfied, decide the application on that basis; and if not satisfied, refer the question to an independent expert, whose opinion the Minister must then treat as correct. That referral step is covered in its own section below.

The evidence: a statutory declaration plus at least two independent items

Regulation 1.24 states the evidence for a non-judicial claim in two parts: a statutory declaration made under regulation 1.25, and the type and number of items of evidence specified by the Minister in a separate legislative instrument.

Regulation 1.25 sets requirements for the statutory declaration itself. It must be made by the spouse, de facto partner or prospective spouse of the alleged perpetrator, and it must set out the allegation, name the person alleged to have committed the violence, and set out the evidence the allegation is based on. Where the declaration is made by someone other than the direct victim — for example, on behalf of a family member — additional requirements apply: naming that other person, and identifying the relationships involved.

The second part — the specified evidence — currently comes from the Migration (Specification of evidentiary requirements—family violence) Instrument (LIN 23/026) 2023, made under paragraph 1.24(b) of the Regulations. It requires a minimum of two items of evidence, each of a different type, drawn from eight categories: a medical practitioner, registered nurse or midwife; a police officer; a child welfare officer; a family violence support service provider (a women's refuge, domestic and family violence crisis centre, or similar community or multicultural crisis support service); a social worker; a psychologist; a family consultant or family relationship counsellor; or an education professional (a school counsellor, principal or teacher who has taught or counselled the alleged victim).

Each item has to identify the alleged victim, generally has to identify the alleged perpetrator or provide information from which their identity can reasonably be inferred, and has to be in writing in English on the provider's professional letterhead, showing their full name, occupation, signature, date, address and contact phone number. The instrument accepts a range of document forms per category — a report, a letter, a hospital discharge summary, a risk assessment, or in some categories a statutory declaration from that professional — rather than one fixed document type.

This page describes those categories because the Regulations define them; it does not advise on which category to approach, how to frame a request to a professional, or how to present an account of events. That is exactly the kind of judgement a MARA-registered migration agent or a family violence caseworker is positioned to help with.

When the Department is not satisfied: the independent expert

If the Minister's delegate is not satisfied, on the statutory declaration and specified evidence alone, that the alleged victim experienced relevant family violence, regulation 1.23(10)(c) requires the case to be referred to an independent expert — and the delegate must then treat the expert's opinion as correct for the purpose of deciding whether the family violence criterion is met.

Regulation 1.21 defines an independent expert as a person suitably qualified to make independent assessments of non-judicially determined family violence claims, who is employed by, or contracted to, an organisation specified by the Minister in a legislative instrument. We could not confirm from a primary source, at the time of writing, exactly which organisation currently holds that specification, so this page describes the mechanism rather than naming a provider — the point that matters procedurally is that the referral is mandatory once the delegate is not satisfied, and that its outcome then binds the decision.

This is a materially different protection from a plain "the officer decided against you" outcome elsewhere in migration decision-making: the Regulations do not let the case simply be refused on the papers where the delegate has doubts. They require a second, specialist opinion, and that opinion — if it favours the applicant — is not something the delegate can then override.

Timing: the violence has to fall within the relationship

Every route in regulation 1.23 — judicial and non-judicial — carries the same timing condition, stated separately for each: the violence, or the part of it that founded the injunction, order, conviction, or independent expert's opinion, must have occurred while the married relationship, de facto relationship, or prospective-spouse relationship existed between the alleged perpetrator and the alleged victim (or their sponsoring partner, depending on the applicant's role). Violence alleged to have occurred entirely outside that relationship window does not engage this framework, however serious.

What these documents can and cannot be used for

Regulation 1.27 restricts where certain documents connected to a non-judicial claim can be used as evidence in a court or tribunal: a statutory declaration of the specified evidence type, a statutory declaration made under regulation 1.25, or an independent expert's opinion. Outside a very narrow set of proceedings — judicial review or merits review of a refusal decision that involved the claim, or a prosecution of the person who made the statutory declaration under section 11 of the Statutory Declarations Act 1959 (the offence of making a false statutory declaration) — these documents are not admissible.

That cuts both ways. It limits how the material can be used against the person who provided it outside those specific proceedings, and it is also the Regulations' own reminder that a statutory declaration made under this framework remains subject to the ordinary law on false statutory declarations.

If your relationship ended without family violence

Not every relationship ending involves family violence, and this framework has nothing to say about a case where it doesn't. Two other exceptions can still preserve a partner visa despite a relationship having ended — where the applicant has an ongoing custody, access or maintenance connection to a child the sponsoring partner also has parental or maintenance obligations toward, or where the sponsoring partner has died — covered in full, with the exact clauses, in our companion article on the child-of-the-relationship and sponsor-death grounds.

Where none of the recognised exceptions applies, the general position is that a partner visa requires the relationship to be genuine and continuing at the time of decision, and separation without a recognised exception puts the application at risk of not meeting that requirement. The procedural detail — the applicant's notification obligation, what a sponsor's withdrawal of sponsorship does, and the difference between withdrawing an application and letting it be refused — is covered on our general guide to what happens when a partner visa relationship ends.

What a MARA-registered agent or a legal centre can help with here

This is one of the situations where the platform's usual boundary matters most. Whether a specific set of facts is likely to meet the relevant family violence definition, which evidence category is realistically available, and how to sequence a claim against an application that is already in progress are all questions about an individual's circumstances — not something a general explainer can answer, and not something this page will attempt to answer.

A MARA-registered migration agent can advise on the migration side of a family violence claim. For family violence support, safety planning, and legal help that goes beyond the visa itself, Community Legal Centres Australia and Women's Legal Services Australia both coordinate networks of free legal services across every state and territory, and National Legal Aid connects to each state and territory's own Legal Aid commission. None of these services requires a migration agent's involvement to be contacted, and none of them charges for an initial conversation.

If you are in immediate danger, call 000. For confidential counselling and support, available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, call 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732. The family violence provisions exist precisely so that no one has to stay in a violent relationship to keep a visa.

Can I stay in Australia if my relationship ends on a partner visa?

It depends on the reason and the stage of your application. If the relationship ended because of family violence by the sponsoring partner, the family violence provisions can allow the visa to be granted despite the relationship ending, at both the temporary and permanent stages. Two other exceptions — an ongoing child-of-the-relationship connection, and the sponsor's death — can also apply. Where none of these applies, the general requirement is a genuine, continuing relationship at the time of decision.

What counts as family violence under the Migration Regulations?

Regulation 1.21 defines relevant family violence as actual or threatened conduct towards the alleged victim, their family unit, the perpetrator's family unit, or any of their property, that causes the alleged victim to reasonably fear for or be apprehensive about their own wellbeing or safety. It is not limited to physical acts against the applicant personally, and a threat of violence is expressly included.

Do I need a court order, an AVO or a criminal conviction to use the family violence provisions?

No. Those are the judicial routes under regulation 1.23, and any one of them is sufficient on its own. Where none exists, a non-judicial claim is available instead: a statutory declaration under regulation 1.25, plus a minimum of two items of evidence from different specified professional categories, under the current Migration (Specification of evidentiary requirements—family violence) Instrument (LIN 23/026) 2023.

What evidence can support a non-judicial family violence claim?

The specified categories are a medical practitioner, registered nurse or midwife; a police officer; a child welfare officer; a family violence support service provider; a social worker; a psychologist; a family consultant or family relationship counsellor; and an education professional. A minimum of two items, of two different types, is required, each on the provider's letterhead with their name, occupation, signature, date, address and phone number.

What happens if the Department isn't satisfied by my evidence?

Regulation 1.23(10) requires the case to be referred to an independent expert — someone qualified to assess non-judicial family violence claims, engaged by an organisation the Minister has specified. The Department must then treat that expert's opinion as correct when deciding whether the family violence criterion is met; it cannot simply refuse the claim on its own view once the referral has occurred.

Does the family violence have to have happened recently, or during the relationship specifically?

The Regulations require the violence — or the part of it that founded a court order, conviction, or independent expert opinion — to have occurred while the married, de facto, or prospective-spouse relationship existed. This timing condition is stated separately for each of the judicial and non-judicial routes in regulation 1.23.

Do the family violence provisions apply to offshore (309/100) applicants?

Yes. Clause 309.221(3) covers the offshore temporary stage and clause 100.221(4) the offshore permanent stage, built the same way as the onshore 820.221(3) and 801.221(6) clauses. The offshore family violence limb carries one extra condition: the applicant must have entered Australia after making the application.

Can my children be covered by the same family violence claim?

The family violence definition extends to conduct towards a member of the alleged victim's family unit, not only the applicant personally, and the visa criteria referring to family violence generally cover a dependent child of the applicant, the sponsor, or both. Whether a specific family member's situation is covered is a question about your circumstances for a MARA-registered agent or a family violence caseworker, not something this page can determine.