Australian Immigration Daily News

AMES Australia is the acknowledged leading provider of comprehensive settlement services for asylum seekers, migrants and refugees. Each year it assists over 50,000 people throughout metro and regional Victoria. The services provided extend across humanitarian settlement, education and vocational training, employment and social participation programs.

Courses include:

• Free English lessons with AMEP
• Get training for the workplace
• Courses for clients registered with jobactive
• Get training to work in the care sector
• Skilled Professional Migrants Program
• IELTS preparation courses

For information about all AMES Australia courses

Walking into the DIBP to visit OMARA in Sydney today was an eerie experience.  

The main foyer was dead.

When the High Court hands down an interpretation of the Migration Act, it is important that we all pay attention.  

So it is important that we be aware of a decision that was delivered by the High Court yesterday, 31 August: Maritime Union of Australia v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2016) HCA 34. 

And that is true even if the case - like this one – doesn’t appear to impact on the day-to-day activities of most Registered Migration Agents and migration lawyers. 

This is a case of of a subclass 457 dependant visa.  Below is the DIBP's grant letter which in our view, leaves the DIBP wide open to fraud.

457-dependant-grant-letter-invites-fraud.pdf

On the above 457 visa grant letter, at the bottom of the page, information identifies the unique ID for the sponsoring business.  This is supposed to be confidential to the business.  The sponsoring business' TRN and Visa Application IDs are also visible.  We have deleted this information from the picture to protect the client and our source.  

Do you find the provisions of the Migration Act that limit the role of a migration agent/lawyer at a hearing before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to be frustrating? 

As we all know, although section 366A of the Act provides that an applicant is entitled, while appearing before the Tribunal, to have am “assistant” present at a hearing that is convened under section 360, section 366A(2) also says that the “assistant” is not “entitled to present arguments to the Tribunal, or to address the Tribunal, unless the Tribunal is satisfied that, because of exceptional circumstances, the assistant should be allowed to do so”. 

Does this mean that as a migration agent or lawyer acting for an applicant you are effectively reduced to being a bump on a log during the hearing?  That you are just an observer, and that there is little value that you can contribute by attending the hearing with your applicant/client?