A natural justice letter is the notice required by section 57 of the Migration Act 1958. It sets out particulars of information the Department holds that would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusing your subclass 820, and invites you to comment. If you are holding one, refusal is on the table and a date is running.
What section 57 requires
Section 57(1) defines relevant information as information, other than non-disclosable information, that the decision-maker considers:
- would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusing to grant a visa; and
- is specifically about the applicant or another person, and not just about a class of persons of which they are a member; and
- was not given by the applicant for the purpose of the application.
All three limbs must be met. Where they are, section 57(2) requires the decision-maker to give particulars of the relevant information to the applicant, in the way considered appropriate in the circumstances; ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, that the applicant understands why it is relevant to consideration of the application; and invite the applicant to comment on it.
The name comes from section 51A, which provides that Subdivision AB of the Act is an exhaustive statement of the requirements of the natural justice hearing rule for the matters it deals with. The statute defines the fair hearing you get at this stage, and this letter is it.
Three kinds of material fall outside the section: non-disclosable information, which section 5(1) defines by reference to national interest, Cabinet deliberations, public interest immunity and breach of confidence; information only about a class of persons; and information you supplied yourself for the purposes of the application.
Important
Some older commentary refers to a subsection 57(3) that limited the section to onshore applications decided without an interview. No such subsection appears in the compilation of the Migration Act in force as at 23 September 2026.
What triggers one on a partner application
The trigger is always the same in law: the decision-maker holds something that meets the section 57(1) definition. On a subclass 820 that is usually information about the relationship that did not come from you, or that contradicts what you gave — an inconsistency between what the applicant and the sponsor separately said, a discrepancy between the relationship you described and a record held elsewhere, information from a third party, material about the sponsor or an earlier sponsorship, or something arising from a document or identity check. Where an interview has taken place, the letter may put back to you something said in it — see partner visa interviews.
The letter itself must contain the particulars, because that is what section 57(2)(a) requires. Read them closely; they define the scope of what you have to answer.
What it signals, and what it does not
It signals that a decision-maker has looked at the file, formed a provisional view, and identified a specific reason the visa might be refused. The obligation to write only arises at that point, which makes this a different event from the routine section 56 letters at requests for more information.
It does not mean the decision has been made. Section 63(3) provides that the decision-maker is not to refuse a visa after inviting comment and before the first of: the comments are given, the applicant says they do not wish to comment, or the time ends. The file is held open for exactly as long as the period runs.
The deadline
The date in the letter governs, and the machinery behind it is section 58. Regulation 2.15 of the Migration Regulations 1994 prescribes the period: 28 days after notification where the invitation is given in writing to an applicant in Australia; 7 days where it is given at an interview or by telephone; 5 days in immigration detention. Section 58(4) allows an extension for a prescribed further period, set by regulation 2.15(4) at 7 days for an applicant in Australia not in immigration detention.
Notification is a legal event: section 494C provides that a document made available through your online account, or sent by email, is taken to have been received at the end of that day, logged in or not.
If the period passes, section 62(2) applies: where an applicant invited to comment does not give the comments before the time has passed, the decision-maker may decide to grant or refuse the visa without taking any further action to obtain the applicant's views. The adverse information then stands unanswered.
How to structure a response
Treat the letter as a list of propositions, answered one at a time.
Address each particular separately, in the letter's own order. Use the Department's wording as your heading, then answer it. A response that reads as a general defence of the relationship leaves the decision-maker to work out which paragraph answers which concern, and the ones they cannot find were not answered.
Explain rather than argue. The decision-maker is not an opponent to be beaten; they are a person who has to be satisfied of something. "We gave different dates for moving in together because we moved twice within six weeks, and here are both tenancy agreements" is an explanation. "The suggestion that our relationship is not genuine is offensive" is not.
Attach evidence to each explanation. Documents contemporaneous with the period in question carry the most weight: leases, statements, tickets, medical records, dated photographs, messages. Where a third party can speak to a fact, a statutory declaration from that person beats your account of what they would say. See Form 888 statutory declarations.
Concede what is true. If a date was wrong, say so and correct it. An applicant who corrects an error is easier to believe on everything else than one who defends every word.
Cover both partners. Where the particulars concern something the sponsor said or did, the sponsor should answer in their own statement.
Keep it readable. A covering index, numbered annexures and a short chronology do more work than length. If there is a language difficulty, provide a translated statement rather than an approximate one.
The risk of answering badly
Everything you send becomes part of the material the decision is made on: section 55 provides that additional relevant information given before the decision must be had regard to. A response that introduces a new inconsistency, overstates a fact a document later contradicts, or answers four of six particulars does not leave you where you started — it adds to the adverse picture. The three failures that do the most damage are silence on a particular, assertion without documents, and a tone of grievance that displaces the substance. None is about the strength of the underlying relationship.
Why this is the last realistic chance
After the period ends, section 65 requires the decision-maker to grant the visa if satisfied the criteria are met, and to refuse it if not. There is no further invitation. What comes next is a refusal notice under section 66 setting out the criterion not satisfied, the reasons and any review rights — and then an application to the Administrative Review Tribunal, with its own fee, its own deadline and a wait of its own. See why 820 visas are refused, appealing at the ART and ART deadlines and fees.
A response drafted with a migration lawyer is more likely to succeed, for concrete reasons. Someone who works with section 57 letters can read the particulars for what the decision-maker is actually unsatisfied about, which is often narrower than the letter appears; knows what evidence answers that point and what merely repeats the application; knows that the period runs from a deemed receipt date rather than the day you opened the email; and will stop you writing the sentence that creates a new problem. The Department publishes guidance on using a legal practitioner. Nobody can promise an outcome, and no one should be believed who does.
What to do next
Diarise the date in the letter today, then list the particulars as separate questions and work out what document answers each one. If you have not already, read how much evidence to provide. If an interview is proposed as part of the same process, see partner visa interviews.
Common questions
What is a natural justice letter?
It is the notice required by section 57 of the Migration Act 1958. Where the decision-maker holds information that would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusing to grant the visa, that is specifically about the applicant or another person, and that the applicant did not give for the purpose of the application, the decision-maker must give particulars of it to the applicant, ensure as far as reasonably practicable that the applicant understands why it is relevant, and invite the applicant to comment on it.
Does a natural justice letter mean my partner visa will be refused?
Not automatically, but it means refusal is being contemplated. The obligation to write only arises where the decision-maker considers the information would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusing the visa. A response that answers the particulars with evidence can change that view. Silence usually does not.
How long do I have to reply to a section 57 letter?
The date in the letter governs. Under regulation 2.15 of the Migration Regulations 1994 the standard period is 28 days after the applicant is notified where the invitation is given in writing to an applicant in Australia, 7 days where it is given at an interview or by telephone, and 5 days for an applicant in immigration detention. Section 58(4) allows a further period, which for an applicant in Australia and not in detention is 7 days.
What happens if I do not respond to a natural justice letter?
Section 62(2) of the Migration Act provides that if the applicant does not give comments before the time for giving them has passed, the decision-maker may decide to grant or refuse the visa without taking any further action to obtain the applicant's views. In practice that means the adverse information stands unanswered and the decision is made on it.
Can I get an extension of time for a section 57 letter?
You can ask, in writing, before the period ends. The extension available under section 58(4) and regulation 2.15(4) is short — 7 days for an applicant in Australia who is not in immigration detention. It is not enough time to start assembling a response from nothing, so treat the original date as the real one.
Sources
Keep reading
How to Check Your 820 Application Status
How to check a subclass 820 application in ImmiAccount, what each status label means, where your application date is, and when to contact the Department.
Read the guide →
Bridging Visa A While Your 820 Is Processed
Who gets a Bridging visa A with an 820 application, when it starts, what work rights it carries, why it ends if you leave Australia, and what replaces it.
Read the guide →
Requests for More Information (s56) Explained
What a section 56 request for more information is, the deadline it sets, what happens if you miss it, how to ask for more time, and how to answer one.
Read the guide →