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

The purpose of this instrument is to amend a drafting error in the repealed instrument LIN 19/186 that added Form 1008 (Internet) as an approved form for a Bridging A (Class WA) visa and removed Form 1008 (Internet) as an approved form for an application for a Bridging E (Class WE) visa.

LIN 20/068 ensures Form 1008 (Internet) is an approved form for a Bridging E (Class WE) visa where an applicant does not have another pending application for a Bridging E (Class WE) visa. This enables a valid Bridging E (Class WE) visa application to be made.

The instrument replicates all other arrangements from LIN 19/186.

...
Continue reading Last modified on
Hits: 1774 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
5

Posted by on in General
BYN18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 80
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Nicholas, Markovic & Lee JJ
Migration law - appellant's Class XA Subclass 866 Protection visa cancelled under s501(3A) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Migration Act) after Minister's delegate formed view appellant had 'substantial criminal record' under s501(6)(a) Migration Act and failed 'character test' - appellant given notice of decision by letter from Department which 'unnamed person' signed - appellant sought extension of time to contend that person who signed letter 'did not hold a delegation from the Minister authorising him or her to do what was required of the Minister by s501CA(3)' Migration Act - Judge Street of Federal Circuit Court dismissed application for extension of time on basis of lack of jurisdiction to deal with appellant's application - Judge Flick of Federal Court of Australia found notification given to appellant of decision to cancel appellant's visa was not a “decision” which was 'susceptible of judicial review' - whether giving of notice under s501CA(3) Migration Act was a “migration decision” 'as defined by' s5 Migration Act - 'privative clause decision' - ss474(a), 474(g) & 474(h) Migration Act - whether to decline to set aside Flick J's judgment 'on discretionary grounds' - whether decision in EFX17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2019] FCAFC 230 'plainly wrong' - whether unsatisfactory explanation for delay - held: Flick J erred in finding Street J lacked jurisdiction to deal with application for extension of time - appeal allowed.
BYN18
DVE18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 83
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Perram, Charlesworth & Stewart JJ
Migration law - appellant applied for Refugee and Humanitarian (Class XB) visa under s46 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) - 'nearly five years passed' before application's determination, by which time appellant was married with son - wife and son join as 'secondary applicants' - Minister refused to grant visa - appellant sought judicial review - Markovic J of Federal Court of Australia accepted that 'Minister had not had regard to the risk of harm faced by the appellant's wife and child' but concluded appellant had not advanced claim concerning risk which gave rise to an obligation to consider the claim - review application was dismissed - whether denial of procedural fairness, failure to undertake statutory task and/or constructive failure to exercise jurisdiction - whether Minister's decision 'legally unreasonable' - held: Markovic J erred in concluding that risk of harm was 'only faintly raised' in statutory declarations and that claim of risk of harm was 'not seriously advanced' - appeal allowed.
DVE18
BEG17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 660
Federal Court of Australia
Perry J
Migration law - first and second appellants were husband and wife - third appellant was son of first and second appellants - Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed decision of Minister's delegate to refused to grant protection visas to appellants - Tribunal accepted first and second appellants' contention that if they were returned to India as an 'inter-caste couple' there was 'real chance' they would be victims of 'honour killings' - however Tribunal found first and second appellants had 'right to enter and reside in Nepal', a right which they 'had not taken all possible steps to avail themselves of' - Tribunal found Australia did not owe appellants protection obligations under s36(3) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Migration Act) - held: Tribunal, contrary to s425 Migration Act, failed to extend 'real and meaningful invitation to the hearing' - appellant were not provided with 'real chance to present their case' - Tribunal's decision unreasonable due its 'failure to advise' appellants they could seek adjournment and 'to put further material before Tribunal concerning 'Nepal issue' - appeal allowed.
BEG17

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

Last modified on
Hits: 1936 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
8

Posted by on in General

At Allianz Global Assistance (AGA) we live and breathe assistance. We’re passionate about helping international students and visitors make the most of their time in Australia without worrying about how to access or pay for health care if they become injured or unwell.

Each year we manage more than 300,000 Overseas Student Health Cover (OSHC) and Overseas Visitors Health Cover (OVHC) memberships and process more than 800,000 claims.

Here are just some of the reasons AGA OSHC and OVHC are a great choice for both your clients and you.

...
Continue reading Last modified on
Hits: 1970 0 Comments
Rate this blog entry:
10

Posted by on in General

THE NEGATIVES OF CATEGORY B ACTIVITIES

NEGATIVE NUMBER ONE: CATEGORY B TAKES LONGER TO COMPLETE

The thing about CPD points is this:  Category B points require agents to spend more time to achieve 1 CPD point.   Instead of spending 1 hour to achieve 1 CPD point as is the case with Category A activities, Category B points require an agent to spend 1.5 hours to get one CPD point.  That means if an agent is going to do 5 Category B points, then they are going to spend 7.5 hours to achieve 5 CPD points.   Not very attractive.  In comparison if an agent does 5 Category A points then it would only take them 5 hours to get 5 CPD points.

...
Continue reading Last modified on
Hits: 2422 1 Comment
Rate this blog entry:
17

Posted by on in General

As far back as May 2014 we covered a story on the best 'professional library' service for Migration Agents.

We are prompted to give our opinion on which professional library service we still think is best and most reliable for RMAs in 2020.   An email came in yesterday from a RMA, which has caused us to write another article on LexisNexis v LegendCOM professional library for RMAs

The email describes a situation where,with LexisNexis,  RMAs are sent the bill for the next subscription just prior to the subscription end date.  If the RMA doesn't want to renew, its too late.  Apparently, under the terms of the LexisNexis contract, an RMA should have given 90 days notice BEFORE the end of the contract year that they were not going to renew their LexisNexis subscription.  So, RMAs are effectively forced to pay for the coming year even though they advise LexisNexis prior to the expiry date, that you they do not want to renew. 
 
We don't believe many agents would be aware of the small print in the LexisNexis contract or be aware of this.

The winner for the most reliable service is still the DIBP's own government product, in our opinion is still LegendCOM.   It's also less expensive and more functional.  They also provide free training from time to time and a free help desk.  LegendCOM is produced on a cost-recovery basis only.

...
Continue reading Last modified on
Hits: 3723 1 Comment
Rate this blog entry:
7
Joomla SEF URLs by Artio