Changes to the Code of Conduct on the horizon?
The OMARA has recommended 65 changes to the Code of Conduct for RMAs, some of which are as follows: "[An RMA] must not seek to abuse any process or procedure in connection with Australian migration law or advise any person to do something which would amount to such abuse ... [An RMA] must not deliberately or negligently provide false or misleading claims or documentation to, or deliberately or negligently conceal relevant information from, the decision maker in relation to any immigration matter they are representing".
Where to find the deadline for merits review
It is commonly said that s 347 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) prescribes the deadline for application for merits review of decisions that are reviewable under s 338. Actually, the deadline is found somewhere else.
Do passenger cards matter?
What happens if a passenger card contains incorrect answers or even if some questions are not answered? Are there any visa implications? If there is any implication, does it make any difference if the passenger card was filled out by someone else?
Changes to the points test
A summary of the changes to the points test that will come into effect on 16 November 2019 for subclasses 189, 190 and 491.
From 500 to 1,500 places
The Work and Holiday arrangement with a particular country has just increased from 500 to 1,500 annual places
LIN 19/084: Definition of a Superyacht
"The purpose of the instrument is to remake the instrument defining a superyacht under regulation 1.15G of the Regulations as the instrument IMMI 09/019 is scheduled to sunset on 1 October 2019. The instrument replicates the definition of superyacht in the previous instrument IMMI 09/019. The new instrument, LIN [19/084] continues to provide the necessary framework for applicants to meet criteria in relation to the superyacht stream of the Subclass 408 (Temporary Activity) visa".
Subclass 870: income test
Subclass 870 (parent) visa sponsorship applicants must show an "overall" taxable income that is above a certain amount. The overall income can be a combination of the sponsorship applicant's individual income with the income of up to 2 other persons specified in legislation. But the sponsor's individual income must also be above a certain threshold. We discuss an example where the income test is not satisfied and an example where it is.
PIC 4020: withdrawing secondary application only
If the Department sends a s 57 (natural justice) letter alleging that the primary and secondary applicants have provide false or misleading information about their relationship, the obvious options are to dispute the allegation and run the risk of a visa refusal under PIC 4020(1) and a 3-year ban under PIC 4020(2) or to withdraw both the primary and secondary applications. A less obvious, yet quite interesting, option is to withdraw only the secondary applicant's application, as we explain.
Subclass 870: sponsors “inherit” public health debt
Sponsors "inherit" any outstanding public health debt incurred by visa applicants and the government can recover the debt from sponsors in court, which could add up to several thousands of dollars of out of pocket health expenses, not to mention legal costs. Practitioners might need to advise both visa applicants and sponsors about that liability. Otherwise, sponsors could seek compensation from, and/or complain against, practitioners on the basis that, had they been informed of the liability, they would not have applied for sponsorship.
Subclass 870 (parent): “relevant departure day”
As discussed in a previous article, if a subclass 870 visa holder who is overseas applies for a further 870 visa, they must be overseas for a number of days by reference to the "relevant departure day". But how to calculate the "relevant departure day"?