Section 61 Request Assistance — New Zealand

The quality of the written submission matters more in a Section 61 request than in most immigration processes. Because there is no application form to guide the structure, and because the decision-maker is under no duty to consider the request or to give reasons, the written case has to do the work that a guided application would normally do. It has to explain how unlawful status arose, why special consideration may be warranted, and what visa class is being sought — in a way that is internally consistent and supported by evidence. Professional legal support shapes that framing from the outset: identifying what to address, how to structure the narrative, and how to present the evidence so that the submission reads as a coherent case rather than a collection of documents. That preparation applies whether the situation involves a prior decline, character considerations, or a relatively contained set of facts — the discretionary nature of Section 61 means there is no version of this process where the written case does not carry the weight.

Most matters begin with an initial review of your situation. We work through your immigration history, your current status, whether a deportation order has been served, and the visa class that would make sense to request. The aim of that first conversation is clarity on whether Section 61 is the right route at all.
If it is, we move into drafting the written submission and assembling the evidence, and then lodge the request and handle any follow-up from Immigration New Zealand. If another route would suit you better — a standard visa application, a variation of conditions, or a different immigration pathway — we say so, and point you to where that work sits. You will not be steered into a Section 61 request if a simpler option is open to you.

Immigration New Zealand does not commit to a processing timeframe for Section 61 requests, and timeframes vary significantly from case to case. Some requests are decided within a few months; others take longer. Factors such as the complexity of the situation, the evidence provided, and INZ workload can all affect how long a request takes.
We do not promise a timeframe, and we are cautious about any source that does. What we can do is keep you informed along the way, respond promptly to any queries from INZ, and — where follow-up is appropriate after a reasonable period — raise that on your behalf.

A declined Section 61 request cannot be appealed on the merits. There is no right to have a different decision-maker reconsider whether the decision was correct. That is a feature of the statutory framework rather than a reflection of any particular case.
The options that may remain are limited and narrow in scope:
Judicial review in the High Court. This looks at the process by which the decision was made, not at whether the decision was correct. It is available only in limited circumstances.
An Ombudsman complaint. This addresses Immigration New Zealand’s handling of the matter, not the substantive outcome.
A fresh Section 61 request. Sometimes appropriate if there has been a material change in circumstances, though not always advisable.
Voluntary departure and a future application from overseas. Depending on timing and circumstances, this may preserve future visa prospects better than other options.
We can explain each of these in more detail, and give you a straightforward view on whether any of them is worth pursuing in your situation.

Deportation action is legally capable of continuing while a Section 61 request is under consideration. A pending request does not, on its own, create a formal suspension of deportation liability.
In practice, a well-prepared request is often a relevant factor in how INZ manages a situation, and deportation action may pause while the request is being looked at. That is a matter of how INZ exercises its discretion, not a legal entitlement. If deportation is a live concern alongside your request, it is important to say so at the first meeting. Deportation liability has its own appeal pathway through the Immigration and Protection Tribunal, subject to statutory windows, and it may need to be addressed in parallel rather than sequentially.

Generally not. Section 61 is available only to people who are currently unlawfully in New Zealand. If you still hold a visa — including an interim visa — a standard further-visa application, a variation of conditions, or another visa category is usually the appropriate route.
A short conversation can confirm which applies. If you are approaching the end of your current visa and are worried about what happens if it lapses, that is a different conversation, and often a more productive one to have before status becomes unlawful rather than after.

No. A partnership with a New Zealand citizen or resident is a factor that is commonly taken into account, and a well-evidenced, genuine partnership can be a meaningful part of a request. It does not on its own determine the outcome, and it does not create a right to have the request considered.
Every request is decided on its own circumstances, and the strength of the partnership evidence matters as much as the existence of the relationship. Where a partnership is central to a request, the evidence generally needs to be at least as complete as it would be for a standard application under the equivalent partnership-based visa category. Part of our role is to help you present that evidence in a way that reflects the full history of the relationship, including any periods that might otherwise look like gaps.

Yes. These situations can make a Section 61 matter more complicated, but they do not automatically rule out a request. We work with people whose circumstances include prior declines, character history, or health considerations.
A significant part of the work in those situations is helping you decide whether a request is worth making at all, and, if so, how best to frame it. Undisclosed issues that surface later during INZ’s consideration tend to make the overall picture harder to present than the same issues addressed up front with context. We are straightforward about when a request has a realistic prospect of being considered and when another route — including voluntary departure and a measured future application — is likely to serve you better.