Two different letters arrive from the Department and both ask you to send something back. They look alike. They are not alike, and the difference decides whether the Department was doing you a courtesy or discharging a legal duty it can be held to.
One is section 56. The other is section 57. Verified against the Migration Act 1958, Compilation No. 171 (C2026C00232, in force 4 June 2026).
Section 56: the Minister may ask
Section 56(1) provides that in considering a visa application the Minister "may, if he or she wants to, get any information that he or she considers relevant" — and that if the Minister does get such information, the Minister must have regard to it in deciding whether to grant or refuse.
Section 56(2) adds that, without limiting that, the Minister may invite the applicant, orally or in writing, to give additional information in a specified way.
Note what is discretionary and what is not. Asking is discretionary. Having regard to what is obtained is not.
Section 57: the Minister must tell you
Section 57 is a duty, and it is confined by a definition.
Section 57(1) defines relevant information as information, other than non-disclosable information, that the Minister considers:
- (a) would be the reason, or part of the reason, for refusing to grant a visa; and
- (b) is specifically about the applicant or another person and is not just about a class of persons of which the applicant or other person is a member; and
- (c) was not given by the applicant for the purpose of the application.
Where information answers that description, section 57(2) provides that the Minister must:
- (a) give particulars of the information to the applicant in the way the Minister considers appropriate in the circumstances; and
- (b) ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, that the applicant understands why it is relevant to consideration of the application; and
- (c) invite the applicant to comment on it.
The three limbs are cumulative
This is where most complaints about natural justice fail, and it is worth being blunt about it. Paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) are joined by "and". All three must be satisfied before the duty arises.
So the duty does not attach to information that:
- would not contribute to a refusal — favourable or neutral material is outside (a);
- is about a class of persons rather than this applicant — country information, general trends and cohort data are outside (b);
- came from the applicant for the purpose of the application — your own form, your own statement, your own documents are outside (c).
That last one accounts for a great many disappointed applicants. If the concern arises from an inconsistency inside your own material, section 57 is not engaged by it.
Non-disclosable information
The definition also carves out non-disclosable information, a defined term in the Act. Where information falls into that category the section 57 duty does not reach it, however adverse it is.
The two compared
| Section 56 | Section 57 | |
|---|---|---|
| Character | Discretionary — "may" | Mandatory — "must" |
| Trigger | The Minister wants more | Adverse, applicant-specific, third-party information |
| Typical content | A gap, a document, a clarification | Something someone else said or a check turned up |
| Source of the information | Anywhere, including you | Not from you (limb (c)) |
| What you are asked for | Additional information | Comment on information |
| If skipped | No breach — asking was optional | Potentially a failure to comply with a statutory duty |
Why the distinction has teeth
Section 63(1) — the provision governing when a decision about a visa may be made — is expressly subject to section 57. The duty is not decorative; it constrains the point at which a decision can lawfully be taken.
A failure to give particulars of relevant information, or to invite comment on it, is therefore a different kind of problem from a decision made after an unanswered section 56 invitation. The first is a defect in the process. The second is simply the consequence of not replying.
What the invitation itself must do
Whichever section it comes under, section 58(1) requires the invitation to specify whether the response may be given in writing, at an interview with an officer, or by telephone.
Section 58(2) requires a response other than at an interview to be given within a period specified in the invitation, being a prescribed period or, if none is prescribed, a reasonable period. Under section 58(4), where the response is due within a prescribed period, that period may be extended by the Minister for a prescribed further period.
How that period is actually counted — and why it usually starts earlier than people think — is set out in how a Department deadline is calculated.
What happens if you do not reply
Section 62 answers this for both sections, and the answer is the same.
Where an applicant is invited to give additional information and does not give it before the time has passed, the Minister may decide to grant or refuse without taking any action to obtain it. Where an applicant is invited to comment on information and does not comment in time, the Minister may decide without taking any further action to obtain the applicant's views.
There is no second letter. The file simply moves to decision with the adverse material unanswered.
Reading your own letter
The letter will usually name its section. If it does not, the question that separates them is where the information came from: material the Department obtained about you, from somewhere other than you, that could sink the application, is section 57 territory; a request to fill a gap in your own case is section 56.
The practical response differs too. A section 56 reply supplies what is missing. A section 57 reply has to engage with an allegation — explain it, contradict it with evidence, or concede and put it in context. What a s57 response should contain is covered in responding to a section 57 letter, and section 56 requests in the section 56 request for more information.
Do not let the clock decide it
Both letters carry a deadline, and section 62 means the deadline is real rather than indicative. The first thing worth doing with either is establishing the actual last day, from the letter and the method it was sent by, before drafting anything. Migration Vision responds to section 56 and section 57 invitations for clients across Australia and offshore. Nobody can promise an outcome — what can be done is to make sure the reply answers the section the letter was actually written under.
Reviewed by Dr Asad Muhammad Khan, Registered Migration Agent, MARN 2619525. Updated 5 September 2026 — sections 56, 57, 58, 62 and 63 of the Migration Act 1958 (Compilation No. 171, C2026C00232, in force 4 June 2026) read from source on legislation.gov.au. This article is general information, not migration advice for your circumstances, and the law may change.
Ready for expert help with your visa?
Book a confidential consultation with an OMARA-registered migration agent in Brisbane.
Book Your Consultation