Partner Visa Evidence: What Regulation 1.15A Actually Requires You to Prove

What "genuine and continuing" actually means in the Act

Section 5F of the Migration Act defines when a person is a spouse: they must be validly married under a marriage recognised for the Act, have "a mutual commitment to a shared life as a married couple to the exclusion of all others," the relationship must be "genuine and continuing," and they must either live together or not live separately and apart on a permanent basis. Section 5CB does the identical work for a de facto partner, minus the marriage requirement. Neither section defines "genuine and continuing" further — that's what regulations 1.15A and 1.09A are for. Each regulation says, in near-identical terms: "For [section 5F(3) / section 5CB(3)] of the Act, this regulation sets out arrangements for the purpose of determining whether 1 or more of the conditions in paragraphs [5F(2) / 5CB(2)] (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the Act exist," then directs the Minister, in considering a Partner (Migrant), Partner (Provisional), Partner (Residence) or Partner (Temporary) visa application, to "consider all of the circumstances of the relationship, including the matters set out" in the four categories below. The phrase "all of the circumstances" matters — the regulation doesn't require you to tick every single sub-factor, but it does require the decision-maker to weigh the whole picture, which is exactly why a strong showing in one category can't simply replace a complete absence in another.

The 4 factors, in the regulation's own words

Regulation 1.15A(3) (spouse) and regulation 1.09A(3) (de facto partner) list the same 4 factors, with minor wording differences reflecting marriage vs de facto status:

**(a) The financial aspects of the relationship**, including: any joint ownership of real estate or other major assets; any joint liabilities; the extent of any pooling of financial resources, especially for major financial commitments; whether one person owes the other a legal obligation; and the basis of any sharing of day-to-day household expenses.

**(b) The nature of the household**, including: any joint responsibility for the care and support of children; the living arrangements of the persons; and any sharing of responsibility for housework.

**(c) The social aspects of the relationship**, including: whether the persons represent themselves to other people as married (or, for de facto couples, as a couple); the opinion of the persons' friends and acquaintances about the nature of the relationship; and any basis on which the persons plan and undertake joint social activities.

**(d) The nature of the persons' commitment to each other**, including: the duration of the relationship; the length of time the persons have lived together; the degree of companionship and emotional support they draw from each other; and whether they see the relationship as a long-term one.

Every document you gather should map to one of these named sub-factors. A joint bank account statement is direct evidence of "pooling of financial resources." A lease in both names goes to "living arrangements." A Form 888 from a friend who can describe how you present as a couple socially goes directly to "the opinion of the persons' friends and acquaintances." Thinking in terms of these named sub-factors, rather than a generic "upload lots of photos" approach, is what makes an evidence file legible to a case officer working through the same regulation.

Why applications actually get refused on evidence

Refusal patterns that migration agents and the Tribunal's own published decisions consistently describe share a structure: not a single missing document, but a whole category of the regulation 1.15A/1.09A test left thin or unaddressed. The financial factor is the one most often left weak — couples who've genuinely combined their lives socially and domestically sometimes haven't pooled finances at all, for entirely ordinary reasons (different income levels, a partner overseas, cultural attitudes to joint accounts), but leave that gap unexplained rather than addressing it directly in a statement. Inconsistency between the two partners' personal statements — different accounts of how the relationship started, different timelines, or descriptions of the household that don't match — is treated as more damaging than a genuine gap in one category, because it goes to credibility rather than just evidentiary weight. Form 888 statements that are generic ("I believe they are a genuine couple") rather than specific and personal carry little weight, because they don't actually speak to any of the named sub-factors in the regulation. And a relationship that's very recent, or where the couple has spent significant time apart, faces a genuinely harder version of the "continuing" limb of the test — not because recency is disqualifying on its own, but because there's simply less history across all four factors for a decision-maker to weigh.

How much evidence is "enough"

There's no fixed document count or page threshold in the regulation — the test is qualitative, weighing "all of the circumstances," not a checklist score. What that means practically is that depth and consistency across all four factors beats sheer volume in one. A couple with a joint lease, two years of joint bank statements, three detailed Form 888s, and consistent personal statements presents a stronger file than one with fifty undated photographs and nothing else. Where a factor is genuinely thin for a legitimate reason — no joint account because one partner is overseas, no shared housing because of work locations, a short relationship because you only recently met — the regulation's "all of the circumstances" language means a clear, honest explanation in your statement is itself evidence the decision-maker is required to weigh, not a confession of weakness to be hidden.

How the two-stage 820→801 (and 309→100) process changes what you need to show

The onshore Partner (Temporary) visa, subclass 820, and its offshore equivalent, subclass 309, are provisional — granted first, with the same four-factor test applied to the evidence as it stands at that point. The permanent Partner (Residence) visa, subclass 801, or Partner (Migrant) visa, subclass 100, is generally not assessed until at least 2 years after the original application was made (there are limited exceptions, including where the couple has been together for a long time or where family violence is involved). At that second assessment, the same four factors apply again, but over the whole period since you first applied — meaning the evidence-gathering task doesn't stop once the 820 or 309 is granted. Continuing to build financial, household, social and commitment evidence through the provisional period is exactly what a strong 801/100 case is made of; couples who treat the provisional grant as the finish line and stop documenting their relationship are creating unnecessary risk at the second stage.

What this means for building your file

Work backwards from the four named factors rather than from a generic template: for each of financial, household, social and commitment, list what you can genuinely provide against each named sub-factor in regulations 1.15A/1.09A, and where a sub-factor doesn't apply to your situation, note why in your statement rather than leaving it silent. For the specific documents that work best in each category — bank statements, leases, Form 888 templates, photograph practices — the companion checklist at `/blog/partner-visa-evidence-checklist-2026` walks through the practical list. For a relationship that's recent, long-distance, or has a genuine gap in one of the four factors, having a MARA-registered migration agent review your file before lodgement is where the regulation's qualitative "all of the circumstances" standard is worth a second, experienced set of eyes. Migratio is Australia's marketplace for finding and comparing MARA-registered migration agents who handle partner visa cases.

Basic eligibility before you gather evidence

The four-factor test only becomes relevant once the basic eligibility criteria are met. You need to be either validly married under a marriage recognised for the Migration Act, or in a de facto relationship — which, under regulation 2.03A, generally requires you to have been in that relationship for at least 12 months immediately before applying, unless you've registered the relationship with an Australian state or territory or you can establish compelling and compassionate circumstances. Both partners are generally expected to be 18 or over. Your sponsor needs to be an Australian citizen, permanent resident, or eligible New Zealand citizen, and sponsorship itself is subject to limits (how many times, and how recently, a person can sponsor a partner) and character checks. None of the four-factor evidence discussed below substitutes for meeting these threshold requirements first.

Evidence when you live apart or apply from offshore

Regulation 1.15A/1.09A explicitly allows for couples who "do not live separately and apart on a permanent basis" rather than requiring literal cohabitation, which is the provision that accommodates long-distance relationships, FIFO work arrangements, and offshore applicants who haven't yet moved to be with their partner. For these cases, the "nature of the household" factor will necessarily be thinner, so the case rests more heavily on the other three: financial support or shared financial planning despite the distance, social recognition of the relationship by friends and family on both sides, and — for the commitment factor specifically — a documented record of ongoing contact and visits: flight records, accommodation bookings for time spent together, call and messaging history, and a clear explanation in your statements of why you're apart and what your plan is to live together. The regulation's "all of the circumstances" language is doing real work here — a genuine long-distance relationship with a credible plan to cohabit is not automatically weaker under the test, but it does need to be actively demonstrated rather than assumed.

What is regulation 1.15A of the Migration Regulations?

Regulation 1.15A sets out the four factors — financial aspects, nature of the household, social aspects, and nature of commitment — that the Minister must consider when assessing whether a married relationship is genuine and continuing under section 5F(3) of the Migration Act 1958. Regulation 1.09A does the equivalent job for de facto relationships under section 5CB(3).

What does "genuine and continuing" mean for a partner visa?

It's a specific legal test from sections 5F and 5CB of the Migration Act: a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others, an ongoing (not one-off or ended) relationship, and either living together or not living separately and apart on a permanent basis. Regulations 1.15A and 1.09A set out the named evidentiary factors used to assess it.

How many Form 888 declarations do we need?

There's no fixed number in the regulation itself. Form 888's own instructions say you "may be asked to submit up to 3 separate statements during the processing of the visa application" — so plan on being able to provide up to three, from people who can speak specifically and personally to the relationship, rather than a larger number of generic ones.

What if we don't have a joint bank account?

It's not a strict requirement of regulation 1.15A/1.09A — "pooling of financial resources" is one sub-factor among several under the financial-aspects category. If you don't have one, explain why clearly in your statement and provide the strongest alternative financial evidence you have, such as documented transfers or shared bill payment.

Does the evidence requirement change between the 820/309 stage and the 801/100 stage?

The legal test doesn't change, but the evidence period does. The permanent 801 or 100 visa is generally assessed at least 2 years after the original application, over the whole period since — so continuing to build evidence across all four factors through the provisional period materially affects the second-stage outcome.

Do married applicants need 12 months of cohabitation like de facto applicants?

No. The 12-month cohabitation expectation applies to the de facto relationship test, not to marriage. Married applicants must still satisfy the genuine-and-continuing test under section 5F and regulation 1.15A, but there is no separate minimum cohabitation period tied to the marriage itself.