Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers. Please email help@migrationalliance.com.au
Either:
(a) the Minister is satisfied that the applicant has not, in the previous 3 years, engaged in conduct that constitutes a contravention of subsection245AR(1), 245AS(1), 245AT(1) or 245AU(1) of the Act; or
(b) both of the following apply:
(i) the Minister is satisfied that the applicant has engaged in such conduct in that period;
(ii) the Minister considers that it is reasonable to disregard the conduct.
[LEGEND Comment - 186.312A Inserted by SLI 2015, 242 with effect from 14/12/2015, See Schedule 13 Part 51 item 5101(4) for transitional arrangements]
Either:
(a) the Minister is satisfied that the applicant has not, in the previous 3 years, engaged in conduct that constitutes a contravention of subsection
245AR(1), 245AS(1), 245AT(1) or 245AU(1) of the Act; or
(b) both of the following apply:
(i) the Minister is satisfied that the applicant has engaged in such conduct in that period;
(ii) the Minister considers that it is reasonable to disregard the conduct.
[LEGEND Comment - 187.31A Inserted by SLI 2015, 242 with effect from 14/12/2015, See Schedule 13 Part 51 item 5101(4) for transitional arrangements]
No.
It reads that the applicant can not have- during the past 3 years - paid the employer in order to obtain the sponsorship.
However - it is not beyond expectation that case officers will (or will be instructed) to interpret this differently.
So in practice we may have the same problem we did a few years ago with the 457 applications.
So basically the employer must be responsible for all costs relating to any Immigration matter that even slightly pertains to the SC186 Visa applicant?