Australian Immigration Daily News

Does it matter if the applicant for a Partner visa is not concerned or interested in the religious life of his sponsoring partner? 

Does a lack of interest in one’s partner’s religious life necessarily mean that an applicant is not providing emotional support to his partner? 

Is it fatal to a Partner visa application? 

The migration consulting business is clearly thriving in Australia.  According to the latest Migration Agent Activity Report released by MARA, during the first half of 2017, registered migration agents lodged 54% of Business Skills visa applications, 76% of the total 457 Temporary Work (Skilled) visa applications and 86% of Employer Sponsored visa applications.  

Industry growth & profitability generally leads to increased supply side competition and this has proven true for Migration Agents in Australia as well.  The chart below highlights a staggering 43% growth of registered agents from 4,899 in 2013 to just over 7,000 in 2017. 

In yesterday’s post, I published news about the most consequential change to the Migration Regulations that will be introduced by the Migration Legislation Amendment (2017 Measures No. 4) Regulations 2017, which will affect Public Interest Criterion 4020.

The amendments, which were made by the Governor-General on 2 November 2017, and which will become effective on 18 November 2017, include a number of additional changes to the regulations.

A summary of these changes is provided below:

What a difference a few words can make!

To paraphrase my good pal from America Donald Trump (who was “elected”, so to speak, just 1 year ago!), "Yuge!” (translation from Trump-speak: “Huge!”)

On 2 November 2017, the Governor General made a hugely consequential change to Public Interest Criterion 4020 through the promulgation of the  Migration Legislation Amendment (2017 Measures No. 4) Regulations 2017. 

How is it possible to know whether the Tribunal has committed jurisdictional error in reviewing the refusal of a Partner visa application?

Consult a crystal ball? An oracle? A spiritualist? A Ouija board, or an “8” ball?

A recent decision of the Federal Court, handed down by Judge Reeves on 27 October 2017 – Sun v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2017) FCA 1270 ­- suggests that these “magical” or “occult” methods may not be needed to determine whether the Tribunal has fallen into error.