Australian Immigration Daily News

The newly created IMMI 18/103 is set to vary the requirements for making a valid application for the specified Partner visas, to address amendments made to the Regulations, specified in the Home Affairs Legislation Amendment (2018 Measures No. 1) Regulations 2018. The changes to the Regulations allow for the specification of the required application form and address for lodgement of a visa application to be specified in the instrument rather than directly in Schedule 1 to the Regulations. This decision is somewhat of significant shift in eligibility assessment of the below mentioned applications given that both practitioners and well as visa applicants have historically relied on Schedule 1 requirements to source this information.  

Relevant Points of Interest Include:

Schedule III of Immi 18/103 The instrument IMMI 18/103 operates to specify the approved form, place and manner for making an application for the following visas:

APRIL KEY POINTS

SHORT-TERM VISITOR ARRIVALS TO AUSTRALIA
- Trend estimates: Short-term visitor arrivals during April 2018 (759,900 movements) increased 0.1% when compared with March 2018 (759,000 movements). This followed monthly increases of 0.3% for both February and March 2018. The current trend estimate for arrivals is 4.0% higher than in April 2017.
- Seasonally adjusted estimates: During April 2018, short-term visitor arrivals (756,300 movements) decreased 1.9% when compared with March 2018 (770,800 movements). This followed a monthly decrease of 1.5% in February 2018 and an increase of 2.7% in March 2018.
- Original estimates: There were 679,700 short-term visitor arrivals to Australia in April 2018.

SHORT-TERM RESIDENT RETURNS TO AUSTRALIA
- Trend estimates: Short-term resident returns during April 2018 (910,500 movements) increased 0.8% when compared with March 2018 (903,500 movements). This followed monthly increases of 0.7% for both February and March 2018. The current trend estimate for returns is 3.3% higher than in April 2017.
- Seasonally adjusted estimates: During April 2018, short-term resident returns (923,400 movements) increased 1.3% when compared with March 2018 (911,200 movements).
- This followed a monthly decrease of 2.4% in February 2018 and a monthly increase of 4.2% in March 2018.
- Original estimates: There were 929,000 short-term resident returns to Australia in April 2018.

Source: ABS-Overseas-Visitors-1.pdf

This bill provides for a sustainable, equitable and humane response to the protection and processing of asylum seekers and refugees in the Asia Pacific region. A key component of this bill is the Asia Pacific Asylum Seeker Solution (APASS), a regional framework to be initiated by the Australian Government in partnership with other Asia Pacific countries. All countries party to APASS must be legally bound to provide effective protection for asylum seekers as provided under international law.

This Act enables the establishment of a network of centres, located in and run by Asia Pacific countries including Australia, where asylum seekers can go to be registered, have their immediate humanitarian needs met and lodge a preference for country of re-settlement. If the asylum seeker selects Australia, and is within the specified quota, this Act establishes a process for assessing their claim in Australia with appropriate oversight, limited timeframes and judicial review. The Act does not allow mandatory detention and priorities the applicant's immediate needs and refugee and international human right laws.

Sources: Refugee-Protection-Bill-2018.pdf and 

Refugee-Protection-Bill-Explanatory-Memorandum.pdf

The former operators of a Melbourne dental practice are facing fresh allegations of significantly underpaying a 457 visa-holder, in a new Fair Work Ombudsman legal action.

Facing the Federal Circuit Court are Nobrace Centre Pty Ltd and its former part-owner and operator, Dr Ari Masters, who formerly operated the No Brace Centre dental clinic in the Melbourne CBD.

The legal action relates to a South Korean national, then aged in his late 20s, who was allegedly underpaid a total of $36,693 for work he performed as a dental technician at the clinic between March 2012 and February 2014.

How far does the right to procedural fairness extend?

Does the right extend so far that an applicant has the right to be notified by the authority that has administered an IELTS test that it intends to cancel her or his test results on the basis that the test was taken by an “impersonator” and not by the applicant herself or himself?

This was the issue that was at the heart of a case that was recently decided by the Full Court, Verma v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2018) FCAFC 87 (7 June 2017).