Australian Immigration Daily News

Do you think that Public Interest Criterion 4020 should impose “strict” or “absolute” liability on a visa applicant?

Should PIC 4020 be applied as grounds for the refusal of an application when an applicant plays no role at all in the creation of a “bogus document”, and that document is in fact created and sent to the Department with the malign purpose of sabotaging or destroying the visa application?

Is it enough that an applicant gives documents to an “intermediary” to send to the Department, and that intermediary then creates the bogus document?

How important do you think it is to read every single word in a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal carefully? 

Would you be prepared to accept that it is exceptionally, extremely, incredibly, unbelievably important that you do so? 

If you are not yet convinced, or even if you are convinced, keep reading! 

How do you know if the Federal Circuit Court has properly considered your case?

This is an extremely important question for visa applicants who have sought to challenge of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal which have affirmed the refusal of their visa applications.

It is surely true that the vast majority of visa applicants who take their cases to the Federal Circuit Court are not represented by lawyers – either due to lack of money to pay a lawyer, or apprehension that it will be extremely expensive to have a lawyer appear for them (in reality, the costs of getting legal representation in a migration matter are likely significantly less than for other types of litigation in Australia, as migration cases are generally dealt with in a “half-day hearing” ).

Is the Migration Act consistent with the expectations of a democratic society?

For example, it is consistent with the concept of the presumption of innocence?

Or does the Act incorporate some “authoritarian” features that may be considered to give the “Executive” – those administering the Act - disproportionate and excessive power to unfairly curtail the rights of visa holders?

Bondle, the client engagement tool that’s helping migration agents across Australia, just released another update to their product incorporating process templates. Before I write any further, I am really excited to share with the members of Migration Alliance that I have secured a special offer from Sandeep Rao, the CEO of Bondle Australia. As part of our existing partnership, Bondle is extending 6 months free access to the PRO license of the product, if you sign up (https://getbondle.com/solutions/migration-agents/) before 1 May 2018. 

When I first heard about Bondle, it seemed like an interesting solution meant to exchange messages and documents. However, over the past few months the product has evolved so rapidly that I wanted to pen this article on how far ahead they are on the innovation curve compared to the other offerings we have in the market.   

For a long time, our industry had very little choice when it came to business software. It was either Migration Manager of Officio – both of which now seem like tools from the stone age that work on specific platforms or with no mobile capability. With Bondle, we get a user-friendly tool for on your computer browser or mobile phone, making it work for you whether you’re a Windows or Mac user. The new entrant, Immisys claims to be the only truly cloud based (which it isn’t) and purposely designed for Australian immigration and education industry.  I think we would all hesitate to use an “Australian Google” or a “Facebook made for Australia”.  Today, it’s all about global reach and the ability to scale so as to price competitively.