Suppose that you have a client whose application for a Subclass 820 Partner (Temporary) visa is refused in the first instance by the Department on the basis that the Department refuses to “waive” Schedule 3 criteria. 

Suppose further that an application for merits review against the refusal of this visa application is taken to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.  And suppose that the Tribunal decides that the Schedule 3 criteria should have been waived, the application for the Subclass 820 visa is remitted to the Department and then granted. 

At that point, is it time to relax, pop the champagne corks and assume that since the Department has made a determination when reviewing the Subclass 820 visa application that your client is in a genuine spousal relationship, that the ultimate grant of a Subclass 801 Partner (Residence) visa is a sure thing?  

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection has adopted new regulations which will give the Department authority to refuse applications for sponsorship of temporary partner visa applications in circumstances where the proposed sponsor has been convicted of an offence involving family violence, or of other “relevant offences”. 

The new regulations have been introduced through the Migration Legislation Amendment (2016 Measures No. 3) Regulation 2016 and are scheduled to come into force on 18 November 2016. 

Here is a link to the Explanatory Statement.

A high-performing, innovative nation needs skilled, talented people to drive ideas from research to commercial reality.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics found that STEM skills jobs grew 50 per cent faster than other jobs between 2006 and 2011.

The StartupAUS Crossroads 2015 report shows that the demand for ICT workers doubled between 1999 and 2012, while applications for tertiary ICT courses declined significantly, indicating a skills gap that needs to be addressed.

To attract the best and brightest entrepreneurial talent and skills to Australia, the visa system needs improvement.

Must the Minister consider whether Australia has non-refoulement obligations before proceeding to cancel a person’s visa on character grounds? 

This complicated and difficult question was addressed in a decision that was handed down last Friday,

9 September 2016, by a panel of the Full Court of the Federal Court in the case of Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Le (2016) FCAFC 120.   

Greetings from Canberra

Closure of Occupations: Unit Group 2231 HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONALS

Effective tomorrow, 10 September 2016, the following occupations will close as the demand for these occupations has been met: