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
ADL17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCAFC 178
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
White, Bromwich & Burley JJ
Migration law - Minister's delegate refused appellant's application for a Safe Haven Enterprise Visa (subclass 790) (SHEV) - Immigration Assessment Authority affirmed delegate's decision - Judge A Kelly of Federal Circuit Court of Australia dismissed appellant's judicial review application - appellant appealed - 'proper application of' s5J(3)(a) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - whether Immigration Assessment Authority was required, in its consideration of complementary protection claims under s36(2)(aa) Migration Act, to apply principles in Appellant S395/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2003] HCA 71 - grant of special leave by High Court to appeal from DQU16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCA 518 - claim of well-founded fear of persecution on basis of appellant's membership of 'particular social group' whether Authority made finding for purposes of s5L(c)(ii) Migration and, if so, whether it overlooked finding in considering application of s5J(3) Migration Act - whether Authority made findings concerning 'particular social group to which the appellant could belong' - whether Authority failed to make assessment as required by s5J(3) Migration Act concerning whether appellant could take steps to 'modify his behaviour' such that 'real chance of persecution' could be avoided - held: Authority's finding concerning ability of appellant to 'avoid a real chance of persecution' was not open - inappropriate and unnecessary to consider whether Authority required to apply principles in to apply principles in Appellant S395/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2003] HCA 71 - appeal allowed.
ADL17
NWWJ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCAFC 176
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Perram, Derrington & Stewart JJ
Migration law - self-represented applicant - Minister's delegate declined to revoke cancellation of applicant's Partner (Residence) (Class BS) visa - Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed delegate's decision - applicant sought judicial review - applicant sought to quash Tribunal's decision - applicant also sought that delegate's decision to cancel visa 'be reviewed and revoked' - applicant also sought review of refusal to grant 'bridging visa application' - failure of applicant to join Tribunal resulting in lack of jurisdiction - 'unparticularised assertion of error' by Tribunal - whether Tribunal relied on 'fraudulent or false' documents - whether applicant denied procedural fairness due to being self-represented and 'being in immigration detention' during hearing - Tribunal's inability to go behind and question conviction when exercising power - HZCP v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCAFC 202 - held: no error in decision of Tribunal - application dismissed.
NWWJ

Minister for Home Affairs v Waraich [2020] FCA 1513
Federal Court of Australia
Anastassiou J
Migration law - applicant revoked citizenship of first respondent - Administrative Appeal Tribunal set applicant's decision aside - applicant sought judicial review - applicant contended failure by Tribunal to consider 'oral evidence' of first respondent - applicant also contended Tribunal had 'misunderstood and misapplied' s34(2)(c) Citizenship Act 2007 ( Cth) in manner 'material to its decision' - “seriously advanced" - “worthy of serious consideration” - whether Tribunal overlooked 'substantial arguments' in particular the argument that that applicant's 'admitted dishonesty' 'over and above' first respondent's convictions favoured affirmation of 'decision under review' - Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v DRP17 [2018] FCAFC 198 - “contrary to the public interest” - “in the public interest" - held: grounds of review established - application granted.
Minister for Home Affairs

Source: https://benchmarkinc.com.au/web/

Last modified on
Hits: 2199 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
0

Posted by on in General

The Immigration (Education) Amendment (Expanding Access to English Tuition) Bill 2020 (the Bill) amends the Immigration (Education) Act 1971 (the IE Act) to expand eligibility for migrants to access English tuition.

The changes made by the Bill will send a strong message regarding the support provided by the Government for migrants to learn Australia¡¦s national language, and the importance of English proficiency for social cohesion. The Bill will enable the Government to further incentivise English language learning, and provide greater flexibility for migrants in the way they undertake English studies. It will provide English tuition to bridge the gap for migrants who are currently ineligible for the program, or who have exhausted their available tuition hours without reaching the level of vocational English.

Specifically, the Bill amends the IE Act to:

  • remove the 510 hour statutory limit on an eligible person¡¦s entitlement to English tuition, in order to support and incentivise English proficiency;
  • amend the upper limit for eligibility to access English tuition to a new level of vocational English, which will enable eligible persons to continue their language learning to a higher level of English proficiency;
  • remove the statutory time limits for registering for, commencing and completing English tuition for certain people who held a visa and were in Australia on or before 1 October 2020; and
  • allow for the provision of English tuition to certain visa holders or visa applicants outside Australia, to support their English language learning in preparation for their migration to Australia.

Source: IE-Amendment-2020.pdf and IE-Amendment-2020-Explanatory-Memorandum.pdf

Last modified on
Hits: 2237 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
0

Posted by on in General

The results for the September 2020 invitation rounds are now published. No invitations were issued for pro-rata occupations. Occupation ceilings are also updated as per latest invitation round results. You can view the updated occupation ceilings here: https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/working-in-australia/skillselect/occupation-ceilings 

Visa subclass

Number

...
Continue reading Last modified on
Hits: 3487 3 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
0

Posted by on in General

The instrument repeals Migration (LIN 18/022: Determination of Daily Maintenance Amounts for Persons in Detention) Instrument 2018 (LIN 18/022) (F2018L01196) made under subsection 262(2) of the Act in accordance with subsection 33(3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (the AIA). Subsection 33(3) of the AIA states that where an Act confers a power to make, grant or issue any instrument of a legislative or administrative character, the power shall be construed as including a power exercisable in the like manner and subject to the like conditions (if any) to repeal, rescind, revoke, amend, or vary any such instrument.

The instrument operates to determine the daily amount applicable to a person for the cost of keeping and maintaining the person in immigration detention at a specified place for a specified period. Subsection 262(3) of the Act requires the amount to be no more than the cost to the Commonwealth of detaining a person at that place for that period.

The purpose of the instrument is to update the information contained in the previous instrument LIN 18/022, with the daily maintenance amount being specified as $456.23 for the period from the commencement date of the instrument to 30 June 2022 inclusive. The decrease in the daily maintenance amount is $32.88.

Source: LIN20037.pdf and LIN20037-Explanatory-Statement.pdf

Last modified on
Hits: 1932 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
0

Posted by on in General
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v MZZMX [2020] FCAFC 175
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Murphy, O'Callaghan & Anastassiou JJ
Migration law - Minister's delegate refused to grant first respondent a Protection (Class XA) Visa - Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed delegate's decision - Judge Riley of Federal Circuit Court of Australian set Tribunal's decision aside - Minister appealed - Minister contended error by primary judge in concluding Tribunal had made 'irrational, illogical or legally unreasonable' finding (ground 1) - Minister also contended that primary judge made findings which were not open on evidence (ground 2) and that Minister was denied procedural fairness (ground 3) - first respondent's counsel conceded grounds 2 and 3 of appeal but sought dismissal of appeal on basis ground 1 was not made out and that there was no "practical injustice" resulting from primary judge's decision - held: appeal allowed
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
EMS18 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCAFC 174
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Murphy, Mortimer & Thomas JJ
Migration law - Minister's delegate refused to grant appellant a Safe Haven Enterprise visa (SHEV) - Authority affirmed delegate's decision - Judge Vasta of Federal Circuit Court of Australia dismissed judicial review application - appellant contended Authority's affirmation of delegate's refusal 'vitiated by a constructive failure to exercise jurisdiction' on basis Secretary had not fulfilled duty under s473CB(1)(c) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Migration Act) 'to provide relevant material to' Authority - whether contravention by Secretary of s473CB(1)(c) Migration Act and, if so, whether contravention could have affected outcome - EVS17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCAFC 20 - held: no contravention by Secretary of s473CB(1)(c) Migration Act - appeal dismissed.
EMS18
Nathanson v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 172
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Wigney, Steward & Jackson JJ
Migration law - delegate of Minister cancelled appellant's visa under s501(3A) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - delegate of Minister 'declined to revoke' cancellation - Tribunal affirmed delegate's decision - Colvin J of Federal Court of Australia accepted Tribunal had not provided appellant with 'fair hearing' with result appellant was denied procedural fairness - however primary judge found breach was not material - primary judge found it was not established that a 'different decision' could have resulted from "compliance" with procedural fairness obligation - whether appellant 'could not have received a different decision if given fair hearing - whether appellant had been denied a 'realistic possibility of a successful outcome' - held (Wigney J, dissenting): appeal dismissed.
Nathanson
Last modified on
Hits: 2231 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
1
Joomla SEF URLs by Artio

Immigration blog

Bizcover Banner
Migration (Arrangements for Parent Visa Applications) Instrument 2026
From 22 April 2026, the Migration (Arrangements fo...
Continue Reading...
Dept of Home Affairs: Partner Processing Newsletter - April 2026
Dear Members  Please find attached a newslet...
Continue Reading...
Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant Exploitation) Act 2026 - Key Update
The Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant E...
Continue Reading...
Migration (Arrival Control) Determination 2026 - Iranian passports
The Migration (Arrival Control) Determination 2026...
Continue Reading...