Legislation Updates
Migration Legislation Tracker
A single source about the status of pieces of legislation, Bills, commencement dates, disallowances, etc
New country added to subclass 462 (work and holiday)
"The effect of the amendment is that a person who holds a valid passport issued by ... will be in a class of persons who are exempt from the requirement to provide a letter of support from their government to apply for a Subclass 462 (Work and Holiday) visa"
‘On the papers’ review for certain student visa refusals
"The amendments of the Migration Regulations provide for the ART’s ability to make decisions ‘on the papers’ in relation to certain applications for decisions to refuse grant of a student visa, without conducting an oral hearing, in appropriate cases..."
Case Law Updates
Distinction between a claim and evidence in support of it?
Federal Court. Is there a "lack of utility in seeking to erect some rigid distinction between so-called “claims” and so-called “evidence in support of claims”"? Can it be said that "the making of a written statement under s 368(1) is not “posterior” to making a decision" and that, rather, "the effect of s 368(6) is that a decision by the Tribunal is made “by” the making of a written statement"?
Thornton and Lesianawai applicable in Victoria?
Federal Court. In circumstances where the non-citizen was convicted in Victoria, did the Tribunal err by applying Thornton and Lesianawai without giving any consideration to the question of whether there was any Victorian law that attracted the operation of s 85ZR(2) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)?
Appeal: is Australia’s agreement with Nauru valid?
High Court. Is the power in s 198AHB of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) conditioned on a requirement to afford the affected person procedural fairness? Does the question of whether to remove a non-citizen is reasonably practicable encompass "an assessment of what will or might be expected to happen to the non-citizen once received into the country to which the non-citizen is removed"? Do ss 198AHB, 76AAA and 198(2B) contravene Ch III of the Constitution in their application to the appellant?









