Natural Justice Letters (s 56 & s 57): How to Respond
A letter from the Department of Home Affairs inviting you to comment is one of the most important documents you will ever receive in a visa application. Handled well, it can save an application. Ignored or mishandled, it is very often the last step before a refusal.
These are commonly called natural justice letters, or procedural fairness letters. In the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) they sit mainly in sections 56 and 57. Knowing which one you have — and what it actually requires — changes how you should respond.
What is a natural justice letter?
Natural justice (procedural fairness) is the principle that you should know the case against you and have a fair chance to answer it before an adverse decision is made.
For visa applications, that principle is largely codified. The Department cannot simply refuse you on the basis of adverse information you have never seen. In defined circumstances it must put that information to you first and give you an opportunity to respond.
When that opportunity arrives, it usually comes as a letter with a firm deadline. The deadline is the part people underestimate.
Section 57 — the invitation to comment on adverse information
Section 57 is the key natural justice provision at the application stage. It applies to what the Act calls "relevant information" — information that:
- would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusing the visa; and
- is specifically about you (or another person), not just about a class of persons; and
- was not given by you for the purpose of the application.
Where the decision-maker holds relevant information of that kind, section 57 requires them to give you the particulars, explain why it is relevant, and invite you to comment. There are exceptions — for example, "non-disclosable information" and information you supplied yourself do not trigger the obligation.
If a section 57 obligation applies and the Department fails to comply, that can be a jurisdictional error — a ground for challenging the decision at the tribunal or in the courts.
Section 56 — a request for more information
Section 56 is different in character. It empowers the decision-maker to invite you to give additional information in support of your application. It is not necessarily about adverse material — often it is a request for documents the Department needs to finish assessing your case.
A section 56 letter is an opportunity. It usually means a decision has not been made and the Department wants more before it decides. Treat it as your chance to complete the picture, not as a formality.
In my experience, section 56 requests are underused as an opportunity. People send only the single document that was named, when the request is really a signal that the file is not yet convincing on that issue. If the Department is asking about your finances, your relationship, or your employment, that is the moment to put in a complete, well-organised body of evidence — not the bare minimum. You rarely get a second invitation, so treat the first one as your best chance to satisfy the concern in full.
The same principle at the tribunal
If your visa is refused and you go to the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART), the natural justice principle follows you. Sections 359A (migration decisions) and 424A (protection decisions) require the Tribunal to give you adverse information it proposes to rely on, and a chance to respond.
The ART reviews the merits of your case afresh. As at 1 July 2026 the application fee for a migration review is $3,727 (a reduced fee applies in some cases). If you receive a tribunal invitation to comment, the same discipline applies — respond fully, in writing, by the deadline.
The deadline is everything
Every natural justice letter specifies a period to respond and a way to respond. Those limits are set by regulation and are generally strict.
If you do not respond within the period, the decision-maker is entitled to proceed to decide your application on the information already before them. In practice that usually means a refusal. Do not assume the Department will chase you or grant an extension — many will not.
The moment you receive one of these letters, note the deadline, and start work immediately.
What triggers these letters
In my experience, natural justice letters most often arise from:
- Inconsistencies between your forms — for example, a discrepancy between your visa application and your Form 80 personal particulars.
- Concerns about documents or information — including allegations that a document is bogus or that information is false or misleading, which engage Public Interest Criterion 4020 (see my PIC 4020 guide).
- Character and background — information that may enliven the character test.
- Relationship or eligibility concerns — for partner and family applications.
How to respond well
A strong response is calm, specific and evidenced. I approach them like this:
Read the letter precisely. Identify exactly what information is being put to you and why the Department says it matters. Answer that, not what you fear it might mean.
Correct the record properly. If the issue is a genuine mistake or an incorrect answer in an earlier form, the correct mechanism is often Form 1023 (notification of incorrect answers). A proactive, documented correction is far better than a defensive explanation.
Provide evidence, not assertion. Statutory declarations, official documents, medical or expert reports — whatever directly answers the concern.
Be honest. Never compound a problem by giving further false or misleading information. PIC 4020 consequences are severe, including bans of three or ten years.
Meet the deadline, in the manner specified. Late or informal responses can be treated as no response.
Two short examples
Consider two people who receive the same kind of letter, putting an inconsistency between their application and their Form 80.
The first treats it as an accusation. They send a short, defensive email close to the deadline, arguing that the discrepancy "doesn't matter". The Department is left with an unexplained inconsistency and refuses.
The second treats it as an opportunity. They identify exactly what the concern is, lodge a Form 1023 correcting the record, and file a statutory declaration explaining how the error arose, with supporting documents — all within time. The concern is answered on the material, not left hanging.
Same facts, very different outcomes. The difference is almost never the underlying merits. It is how the response was framed and evidenced.
The letter is not the whole case
It is worth keeping perspective. A natural justice letter tells you what is currently troubling the decision-maker — but a visa is granted or refused on the application as a whole. A strong response answers the specific concern and, where appropriate, shores up the rest of the application so a single issue does not become the reason for refusal.
If the Department got it wrong
Sometimes a visa is refused without a required section 57 opportunity ever being given, or the letter was defective. Where a natural justice obligation was owed and not met, the refusal may be affected by jurisdictional error.
That does not fix itself. It has to be raised — at the ART, or on judicial review in the Federal Circuit and Family Court. If you suspect you were never fairly put on notice of the real reason for a refusal, have the decision reviewed by someone who reads these letters for a living.
How long do you have, and how should you send it?
Each letter sets its own period, and the period is prescribed rather than negotiable. Depending on the type of letter and how it is sent, the response window may be a set number of days from receipt. Do not try to reverse-engineer the deadline yourself — take it from the letter, and diarise it the day it arrives.
Equally important is the method. If a letter invites a response in a particular way — by a specified email address, through ImmiAccount, or in writing to a nominated officer — use exactly that channel. A thorough response sent the wrong way, or a day late, can be treated as no response at all.
Build the evidence around the concern
The strongest responses I prepare share a structure. They open by stating plainly what has been put to us. They answer that precise point. And they attach evidence that independently supports the answer — not just the applicant's own say-so.
That might be an official document that resolves an apparent discrepancy, a medical or expert report, corroborating statutory declarations, or a properly lodged Form 1023 that corrects the record. What it should never be is a bare denial. Decision-makers weigh evidence, not assertion, and the burden of putting the favourable material forward is effectively on you.
A natural justice letter is not a rejection. It is the Department telling you what is standing between you and a grant, and giving you a chance to fix it. Used properly, it is an opportunity — but only if you act on it quickly and carefully.
Questions and answers
What is a section 57 natural justice letter?
It is a letter the Department must send before refusing a visa on the basis of 'relevant information' — information that would be the reason (or part of the reason) for refusal, is specifically about you, and was not supplied by you. The letter gives you the particulars, explains why the information matters, and invites you to comment before a decision is made.
What is the difference between a section 56 and a section 57 letter?
A section 56 letter invites you to provide additional information the Department needs to finish assessing your application — it is often not adverse. A section 57 letter puts specific adverse information to you and invites you to comment before it is used to refuse you. Both carry firm deadlines, but section 57 is the codified natural justice obligation.
What happens if I miss the deadline to respond?
The deadline in a natural justice letter is set by regulation and is generally strict. If you do not respond in time and in the manner specified, the decision-maker can proceed to decide on the information already held — which usually means a refusal. Do not assume the Department will follow up or extend time. Act the moment you receive the letter.
Can a natural justice letter be about a discrepancy in my Form 80?
Yes. Inconsistencies between your visa application and your Form 80, or between forms and other records, are a common trigger. If the issue is a genuine mistake, the correct step is often to correct the record properly using Form 1023 (notification of incorrect answers), supported by evidence, rather than simply explaining it away.
What if the Department refuses my visa without giving me a chance to respond?
Where a section 57 obligation was owed and the Department did not comply, the refusal may be affected by jurisdictional error. That can be a ground for review at the Administrative Review Tribunal or for judicial review in the Federal Circuit and Family Court. It has to be identified and argued — it will not be corrected automatically — so have the decision assessed quickly.
Should I get legal advice before responding to a natural justice letter?
It is strongly advisable, particularly where the concern involves documents, false or misleading information, character, or a relationship. How you frame the response, what evidence you attach, and whether you correct the record can determine the outcome — and a poorly judged response can make things worse. Because the deadlines are short, seek advice as soon as the letter arrives.