Asian Holiday Makers Travelling To Australia: Partner Visas And Migration Essay.

Partner Visa Classes 309/100 and 820/801

Discuss About The Asian Holiday Makers Travelling To Australia.

It is worthwhile to refer here that before July 2009, Partner visas in Australia were split into Spouse  visas belonging to subclasses 309/100 and 820/80, visas applicable for couples in formal marriage and interdependencies visas for couples sharing same-sex relationships. However, after July, 2001 such distinction has been eliminated and the nature of Interdependency visas has been renamed as Partner visa (309/100 and 820/801). The major difference between the 309 and 820 visa is that the offshore applicants can apply for 309 visas while the onshore applicants can apply for 820 visas. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that in case of de-facto partners, the person must be in a formal married relationship. However, in this context, the only exception available to offshore Partner visa is that the person must apply such visa prior to marriage in order to make sure that both the persons are formally married by the time the visa has been granted. Therefore, 309 visas are for offshore applicants while 820 visas are for onshore applicants. In this regard, it is worth noting that, substantive visas can be held by any onshore applicants. Therefore, in the present scenario, it can be stated that Charles will be eligible for both 309 and 820 class visa. According to the provisions of Schedule 1 of the Migration Regulations, a person would be eligible for applying both classes of visas in a concurrent way by using the prescribed application form and paying the application charge.

The Migration Act 1958(Cth) has established rules governing immigration for the purpose of entering into Australia. In order to make valid application for a visa, it is important to fill up the prescribed form of visa with the payment of required application charges by satisfying the criteria that has been prescribed for the particular visa. In this regard, it is noteworthy to mention here that visas can be both temporary and permanent. In order to make application for a temporary or permanent visa, a valid application has to be made in writing depending upon the type of visa. Partner visas under class 309 and 820 once granted are valid for 2 years from the date of application. However, these visas are considered to be temporary and at the end of the tenure of two years, the applicants can proceed to apply for permanent visas without making an attempt to apply for 100 visas for offshore applicants and 801 visas for onshore applicants. In order to make an valid application for visa, it is important the both the applicants must have domiciled in Australia and must have stained the age of majority i.e. 18 years in order to apply for a valid partner visa. However, in case, if the age of one of the applicant is below 18 years then the guardian of such applicant must represent such applicant however such guardian must be a citizen of Australia. According to the provisions of Section 46 of the Migration Act 1958, an application for a visa is valid only if it is for a visa of a class that has been prescribed in the application. The nature of the application has to be such that it satisfies the prescribed requirements under the provisions of the Section 46 of the Migration Act 1958.

Application Requirements

According to the provisions of the Migration Act 1958, a visa application can be considered to be invalid if it does not comply with the requirements of the Act as prescribed. In this regard, it is required on the part of the applicant to refund any fees contained in Schedule 1or any fees paid in connection to such visa application which has been declared by the higher authorities to be invalid. Furthermore, it can be stated that if a visa application is invalid it cannot be considered as a ground of refusal and in such cases, the applicant may file another visa application. In this regard, it is worth noting that, from the very beginning the Migration Act 1958 has excluded assessments of invalidity from consideration by the Migration Review Tribunal (MRT) or the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT). Therefore, if a visa application has been declared to be invalid then the applicant is at the authority to challenge such determination by bringing a claim for judicial review. It is worthwhile to refer here that, if the visa application has been rejected on the ground of non-disclosure of information, misleading or incorrect information, then in such case, the application of such applicant can be refused as a result of failure to satisfy PIC 4020. If a person is refused a visa on the ground of invalidity, then the further consequences faced by the applicant is regarding a provision which is known as 48 bars which would be preventing such applicant from lodging further visa applications in Australia. However, limited ranges of visas are available for parties which can be lodged that falls under subclass 820 / 801 partner visas and protection visas.

1. 8101 is related to no work visa.
2. 8201 is concerned with a visa permission of maximum three months study.
3. 8503 is associated with no further stay.
4. 8501 deals with health insurance.
5. 8558 deals with maximum twelve moths stay.

However, the Visitor Visa Class FA subclass 600 is applicable for those people who visit Australia as tourists and for the purpose of conducting business activities. The Visitor Visa Class FA subclass 600 is considered as a temporary visa. The streams under which this class of visa falls can be emphasized as-

• Tourist stream: In order to apply for this visa, the person must be residing in Australia while the visa has been decided. In order to apply for such visa outside the jurisdiction of Australia, the person must be residing outside the jurisdiction when such visa is being decided.
• Sponsored Family stream: For the purpose of applying this visa, the person must be residing in Australia. In this regard, it is worth noting, that the person cannot apply for another visa after arriving in Australia.
• Business Visitor stream: In order to apply for such visa, the person must be living outside Australia.
• Approved destination status stream: For the purpose of applying such visa, the person must be residing outside the jurisdiction of Australia.

In the present scenario, the application of Roland was considered to be invalid because the visa application did not comply with the requirements of the scheme under the Migration Act 1958. In his application for achieving the Partner visa, the condition of no further stay which is contained in 8503 was present in his application. Therefore, as a result of it, the application for Partner visa got rejected. Therefore for the purpose of making an application for valid visa, the person must have personally known and has met the Australian sponsor physically. Both the partners must have applied for both 309 visas and 820 visas. In this regard, it is noteworthy to mention here that, 309 visas for offshore applicants. The 820 visas are for onshore applicants. However, onshore applicants have the authority to hold any substantive visa at the time of making the application. In this context, it is worthwhile to refer here that, the conditions of No Further Stay which are depicted in 8503 should not be attached to it.

Validity and Duration

The Australian registered Migration Agents are bound to follow the regulations contained in the Code of Conduct as developed by the Migration Agents Regulations 1994. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that migration agents causing breach under the Act may lose their registration. The Migration Agents Regulations 1994 has been covering the provisions of professional conduct, obligation towards clients, relations between agents, keeping records, prescribed fees and charges, termination of services, duties of migration agents to their clients and client awareness. Therefore, in the present scenario, being a registered agent under the Migration Agents Regulations 1994, such an agent is bound to follow the rules of Migration Agents Code of Conduct that has been already displayed for the purpose of client communication. In this regard, it is worth stating that, if any of the contraventions are breached by a Migration agent then he may cease to practice in future and may lose his registration in the process. It can be noted that in some cases, the migration agents could be terminated from their service for breach of conduct.

In case of any invalid application of visa has lodged, there are provisions under the Migration Act 1958 that may require to provide information to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection in relation to any incorrect information that has been given in regard to the application for visa of the concerned person. Therefore, in case of lodging of invalid visa application, the Migration Agent will be causing breach of conduct. In regard to the wrong information given to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection, the application of visa that has been declared to be invalid, reasonable notice must be given for non-compliance however; there is an obligation to correct the wrong information that has been provided. It is worth mentioning that, if an invalid application is lodged which do not comply with the requirements of the Migration Act 1958, and then such visa shall be liable to be cancelled. Therefore, in the present scenario, if an invalid visa application is lodged on the part of Ronald, then the code of conduct of the Migration Agents Regulations 1994 shall be breached and the Migration Agent involved in such process shall breach his duties. The Department of Border Protection (DIBP) is at the authority to look into the matter from time to time. If the criteria of valid application of visa are not met then such application is considered to be invalid. As a result of it, it can create disastrous consequences upon the applicant for which the migrant agent shall also be liable in case he has performed any breach of conduct. In this regard, the applicant does not have the option to apply for a bridging visa for the purpose of remaining lawfully in Australia. The applicant shall also not have the right to appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Migration Review Division and the Federal Courts for the purpose of making such application valid.

References:

Chung, Mona, and Bruno Mascitelli. "“We Still Don't Like You but We Want Your Money”: The Case of Chinese Migration to Australia." Management Strategies and Technology Fluidity in the Asian Business Sector. IGI Global, 2018. 88-98.

Fozdar, Farida, and Susan Banki. "Settling refugees in Australia: achievements and challenges." International Journal of Migration and Border Studies 3.1 (2017): 43-66.

Ghafournia, Nafiseh, and Patricia Easteal. "Spouse Sponsorship Policies: Focus on Serial Sponsors." Laws 6.4 (2017): 24.

Kuo, Mei-Fen, and John Fitzgerald. "Chinese Students in White Australia: State, Community, and Individual Responses to the Student Visa Program, 1920-25." Australian Historical Studies 47.2 (2016): 259-277.

Li, Yao?Tai, and Katherine Whitworth. "When the State Becomes Part of the Exploitation: Migrants’ Agency within the Institutional Constraints in Australia." International Migration 54.6 (2016): 138-150.

Lyneham, Samantha, and Kelly Richards. "Human trafficking involving marriage and partner migration to Australia." (2014).

Murphy, Kerry. "A tale of two refugees." Eureka Street 26.12 (2016): 67.

Murphy, Kerry. "Punitive truth behind Dutton's' sham marriage'furphy." Eureka Street 26.22 (2016): 40.

Nagai, Hayato, Pierre Benckendorff, and Aaron Tkaczynski. "Exploring the motivations of Asian working holiday makers travelling to Australia." Tourism Studies 18 (2018): 43-53.

Thomson, Lisa, Monica O'Dwyer, and Ada Chan. "Hidden assets: partner-migration, skilled women and the Australian workforce." (2016).