A recent decision of the Federal Court constituted by Perry J highlights the role of a Mr Satchi, apparently not a Solicitor or an RMA, in the conduct of a case...
http://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2019/2019fca0029
Singh v Minister for Home Affairs (No 2) [2019] FCA 29
Beni v Minister for Immigration and Anor [2018] FCCA 756
On 18 December 2018 the Full Federal Court in the case of Beni found that the decision in Brown No2 was incorrectly decided and that there was no provision for an extension of time in the filing of applications at the AAT in migration matters generally from a first instance decision of DOHA.
...
This is hot off the press...http://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/1997/1997fca0809
As a general rule where an applicant is successful at the FCC or Federal Court and the matter is remitted back to the AAT for reconsideration then the same member should not hear the matter again.
This is a perfectly reasonable conclusion and you should insist on in every case.
A new year is upon us all.
The various participants in fora on face book are all clamouring for advice.
If you have a problem, or you want some advice but you don't want everyone to know what the problem is...send me an email.
...
Imagine this scenario....Your client made an application for a 457 before 17 April 2017 and it was refused and you are on appeal at the AAT.
The substantive issue was an assertion by DOHA that the position was not genuine.
However, you are now at the AAT and you are winning on the genuine position issue and then the Tribunal ambushes you by saying words to the effect, '...however, notwithstanding that the subject position is genuine it is subject to a caveat and you do not meet that requirement."
...
Login / Join
