Christopher Levingston Blog

The deregulation of the migration advice profession, and in particular the fact that lawyers (with an unrestricted practising certificate) will  be unable to register as RMAs is creating fertile ground for speculation that Lawyers are out to "get" RMAs.

Keeping in mind the proposals advanced by the Law Council I think it is fair to say that the horse has bolted a long time ago, and the Law Council proposals have no hope of being implemented. The attempt to in effect curtail the matters that RMAs can handle (AAT) is too little too late.

RMAs are well established and have a great record of compliance with the Code of Conduct.

Following a recent decision of the AAT involving a long term PR ( 70 yrs) and what appears to be a communication problem...there is a lesson in this for all of us...

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/AATA/2020/31.html

In this case the Applicant appointed his Solicitors and a form 956 was on foot and communication was opened...at some stage in the future the same solicitor engaged in further communication with the Department but used a different email address  ( it was different to the form 956) and no new or fresh 956 was put on foot.

A recent decision of the Federal Court constituted by His Honour Rares J has found that when the Minister purports to exercise powers under section 501 and fails to give consideration to the non-refoulment obligations that  purported decision is invalid.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FCA/2019/2189.html

Dear Colleagues,

Best Wishes to you all for Christmas and the New Year.

All keep safe and relax.

This case involved an unrepresented applicant who ran his case at the FCC but was unsuccessful.

AAM17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2019] FCA 1951

https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2019/2019fca1951