System Message:

Australian Immigration Daily News

Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers. Please email help@migrationalliance.com.au

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

Posted by on in General

Migration Alliance has received the following email from the AAT's Deputy President and Division Head:

As you’re aware, the Tribunal recently resumed limited in-person hearings at locations suitable for such arrangements, with the listing of in-person hearings considered on a case by case basis in accordance with the AAT’s practice directions. However, many MRD hearings will continue to be conducted by video/phone due to concerns related to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Further to discussion at our recent meetings, I am writing to invite submissions to identify review applications considered suitable for video hearings for Partner and Family cases lodged to the Tribunal prior to 1 April 2018. This initiative is a small trial to address the aging backlog and difficulties in arranging for in-person hearings for these cohorts of cases case due to the current situation arising from COVID-19. 

...
Continue reading Last modified on
Hits: 740 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
0

Posted by on in General
Huynh v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2020] FCAFC 153
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Reeves, Bromwich & Anderson JJ
Migration law - first respondent's delegate refused to grant appellants a Partner (Residence) (Class BS) (Subclass 801) visas under s65 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Migration Act) - Tribunal affirmed delegate's decision - Judge Burchardt of Federal Circuit Court dismissed judicial review application - whether denial of procedural fairness arising from primary judge's reliance on 'draft reasons for judgment' which were not provided to appellants - a different Federal Court judge had prepared the draft reasons - whether failure by Tribunal to satisfy 'relevant statutory criterion' - whether 'proper evaluation' of considerations concerning first appellant's 'relationship with sponsor' - whether denial of procedural fairness arising from Tribunal's failure to provide appellants with information - s5F Migration Act - held: appeal dismissed.
Huynh
CSZ16 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCAFC 156
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Jagot, Charlesworth & Snaden JJ
Migration law - first respondent's delegate refused to grant appellant a Temporary Protection (Subclass 785) visa - Immigration Assessment Authority affirmed delegate's decision - Judge C. E. Kirton QC of Federal Circuit Court of Australia dismissed judicial review application - appellant contended Authority made 'fundamental conceptual error' in considering 'risk of violence in Kabul' relevant to whether appellant had 'well-founded fear of significant harm in Kabul', but failing to consider the risk of violence in Kabul relevant to whether reasonable for appellant to relocate to Kabul - s36(2B)(a) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - whether error of kind in CXO16 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 17 - 'complementary protection assessment' - held: jurisdictional error not established - appeal dismissed.
CSZ16
Giakou v Department of Home Affairs & Anor [2020] FCCA 2575
Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Judge Heffernan
Migration law - first respondent's delegate refused to grant applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) subclass 570 visa - admissibility of affidavits - whether Tribunal failed 'to give proper, genuine and realistic consideration' to applicant's application - whether error in sense identified in Minister for Immigration & Border Protection v MZYTS [2013] FCAFC 114 - whether Tribunal erred in construction of ‘enrolled in or the subject of a current offer of enrolment' in cl 570.232 Sch 2 Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) - whether Tribunal asked itself wrong question - whether failure to inquire resulting in failure to conduct review - Wei v Minister for Immigration & Border Protection [2015] HCA 51 - whether unreasonableness - held: Tribunal erred in construction of ‘enrolled in or the subject of a current offer of enrolment' - Tribunal asked itself wrong question - material errors established - Tribunal's decision quashed.
Giakou

Source:  Benchmark

Last modified on
Hits: 364 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
0

Posted by on in General

Australian immigration lawyer, also the 2019 winner of Lawyers Weekly 30 under 30, Traci Chen has released a fun TikTok.  For those RMAs and Lawyers who are a little older, hold onto your seats! This might just represent the next generation of agents and lawyers in our profession.

Either way, its a bit of fun:

Traci's TikTok (click here to watch)   - turn on the sound

Last modified on
Hits: 655 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
1

Posted by on in General

The Morrison Government is making a number of changes to student visa arrangements to ensure Australia remains a priority destination for international students as we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic.

International students are extremely important to Australia and our economy, contributing $40 billion annually and supporting 250,000 jobs. Many also go on to become great Australian citizens.

While the closure of our international borders has been critical to our success in slowing the spread of the coronavirus, and Australia has been a leader in this regard, it has presented challenges to the education sector and students, both here and offshore.

...
Continue reading Last modified on
Hits: 477 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
0

Posted by on in General

It has come to the attention of Migration Alliance that a small number of Registered Migration Agents (RMAs) have been promoting a view that the sky is going to fall in with the removal of 2000+ lawyers out of Registered Migration Agent population of 7000+.  Their predictions include the fact that this is going to cause a catastrophe for vulnerable consumers because every lawyer in Australia is suddenly going to get involved with migration applications.

The concerns of these RMAs seem to stem from the recently taken decision to remove lawyers from the requirement to register as an RMA, and their supervision by the Office of the MARA (OMARA) in line with the recommendations of the Kendall Report (The Deregulation Bill 2019).

These RMAs also seem to think that 60,000 Australian lawyers will be unleashed on the community, and that those lawyers have no training or experience in immigration law.

...
Continue reading Last modified on
Hits: 1629 4 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
6
Joomla SEF URLs by Artio

Immigration blog

Bizcover Banner
Department of Home of Home Affairs Annual Report 2019-2020
Below is the 2019-2020 Annual Report for the Depar...
Continue Reading...
Home Affairs releases provisions on Refunds of Visa Application Charges
The Department of Home Affairs has released inform...
Continue Reading...
Australia’s Successful Refugees: A focus on Liaqat Khan
There are numerous stories about refugees that com...
Continue Reading...
Summary of State Nominated 190 Visas Across Each State
Following last week’s budget as well the National ...
Continue Reading...