Legislation Updates
Migration Legislation Tracker
A single source about the status of pieces of legislation, Bills, commencement dates, disallowances, etc
Disclosure of information to prescribed bodies
"The purpose of this instrument is to specify the prescribed bodies to which authorised officers may disclose identifying information under regulation 5.34D of the Migration Regulations"
New complying investments for subclasses 188 and 888
The intent of the new instrument "is to ensure that the Department can process the ‘complying investment’ criteria in Subclass 188 and Subclass 888 visa applications that were made prior to 31 July 2024 but are not yet finally determined"
Case Law Updates
Plaintiff M1/2021 distinguished due to para 8.1.2(2)(b)(i) of Direction 110?
Federal Court. The High Court's majority held in Plaintiff M1/2021 that a decision-maker must "read, identify, understand and evaluate" representations made for the purposes of s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), even though that provision does not render every statement in a representation a mandatory consideration. Should that be contrasted with para 8.1.2(2)(b)(i) of Direction 110, which renders 'information and evidence on the risk of the non-citizen re-offending' a mandatory consideration?
Clause 132.227(2)(b): significant benefit implied?
High Court (single Justice). Do the words 'benefits the Australian economy' in cl 132.227(2)(b) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) imply a significant benefit?
Logical to reason that appellant was a risk to community, even though he would...
Federal Court (Full Court). Was it legally unreasonable, irrational or illogical for the Minister to conclude that the risk that the appellant posed to the community and community expectations weighed in favour of cancellation of his visa when the appellant would remain in the community anyway on a BVR because of the effect of NZYQ?
Industry Updates
Increased Tribunal fees
Tribunal application fees will increase from 1 July 2024 as follows...
Did para 8.3(4)(f) require consideration of child’s own views of removal...
Federal Court. Can it be said that, as the Applicant did not raise with the Tribunal his age or health as relevant were he to be removed from Australia, par 9.2(1)(a) of Direction 90 did not require the Tribunal to take those matters into account, as that provision only required such matters to be taken into account 'where relevant'? Did para 8.3(4)(f) of Direction 90 require the decision-maker to have regard to a child’s own expression of the importance to him or her of the non-citizen seeking review of a decision affecting his or her visa, instead of only considering the evidence of adults as to the adverse impact?
Can unauthorised maritime arrivals apply for visas?
Can an "unauthorised maritime arrival" apply for any type of visa while in Australia? Is the answer determined by s 48 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)?
Media Updates
Increased flexibility for international students to support supermarkets
The Federal government has recently announced as follows: "Today the Morrison Government has announced that supermarkets in States and Territories subject to COVID-19 lockdowns...
Can non-compliance with social distancing lead to cancellation?
"I will also say a very clear message to those backpackers who may not be adhering to the social distancing rules... [Y]ou will be breaching your visa condition and if we find that out, we will be kicking you out of the country". We discuss whether non-compliance with social distancing rules can in fact lead to a breach of a visa condition and ultimately the cancellation of a working holiday, work and holiday or other visas.
Some students able to work more than 40 hrs / fortnight
"Australia’s major supermarkets will temporarily be able to offer more hours to international student employees to help keep shelves stocked". It will be interesting to see whether this measure is extended to other industries until the situation is normalised.