Arshad

Correction: The lawyer knows the exact number of people joining the class action but they are definitely more than 3 The lawyer is only asking for 5K per applicant, not 500K!

ATTENTION ALL CAPPED AND CEASED 175, 176 & 475 APPLICANTS We are ready to file a case in the High Court against the cap and cease order. Those who are interested and have not yet joined, please get in touch quickly with Christopher Levingston, the lawyer who will be acting on our behalf at christopher@levingston.com.au Thanks

It is so ironic and sad that those who were once part of the unfair Category 5, and were once coming to this forum for some good news and hopeful advice are the ones who are now coming back - after being lucky and getting their PR - to post the snippiest of remarks about the situation of the cap and ceased ones. Those who have nothing to do with Cat 5 have at least shown sympathy and concern. If we want you to tell us what to do with our life, we will ask you. In the meantime, since the main curiosity about the case seems to be to hear about the futility of the attempt and as people are 'sure' about the outcome, let the case and its outcome remain the concern of the people involved.

Thanks for your kind advice, we are moving on ... with the case.

Request for support I just signed the petition, "Federal Government, Immigration and border protection: Valid Family Sponsored Skilled Visa applications 175,176 and 475 ceased after 8 years in Limbo." at change.org. I think this is important. Will you sign it too? Here's the link: http://www.change.org/p/federal-government-immigration-and-border-protection-valid-family-sponsored-skilled-visa-applications-175-176-and-475-ceased-after-8-years-in-limbo Those who think at least raising one's voice against injustice is everyone's right and we are doing the right thing, pls sign, others just ignore this post. Thanks,

True. They really don't care, we've been saying that all along.

Yes, I do think that they don't realize they are playing with people's lives. As for us not getting a visa, we have already been told that.

As I understand it, it is $5000 for a class action if we decide to file a case as a group. And it is my time so I can do what I please with it. We may not get the visa but someone's got to make the DIBP realize that they have been unfair and next time they take a moment before playing with people"s lives.

This is someone who wants to take the DIBP to the courts - we didn't ask him for it, he wants to do it on his own i guess, But he is kind of asking for peanuts - $5000, for the case, and if it is a class case, everyone gets to pay so little. Hummmm so we will be actually paying him peanuts ... wonder what it makes him then? Any inputs Mr Russel? Or PM me about it. Others, pls contact him if you want. Cap and Cease High Court challenge Following the pre-emptive Cap and Cease strike by the Assistant Minister and the complete lack of consultation, proceedings have been commenced in the High Court challenging the legal basis of the cease and cap. All candidates for any visa ceased or capped (ie sc176 and 475) are being invited to join the action. Other proceedings concerning all criminal deportation and non revocation of cancellation will also commence shortly. Professional costs inclusive of the High Court filing fees are set at $5k. Any enquiries to me Christopher@levingston.com.au Persons ceased should not ask for a refund from DIBP if they intend to fight the matter. Christopher Levingston BA LLB MARN 9301108 Accredited Specialist Immigration Lawyer

Mr Russell, so far we are only coming across monkeys though we are ready to pay more than peanuts, can you please suggest some Top Gun lawyer who would be ideal for our case? Pls inbox me the infor. Has anyone started the process for a refund, from what I have come to know they want a 'copy' of the credit card used SEVEN years ago, and bank Receipt!?!?!?! Pls share details if you have. I am not interested in a refund but if they are going to seize our money like they ceased our applications, We need to highlight it at least in the media. Thanks

both these figures are difficult to give at the moment as it is a bit early. we are around a 100 who have so far committed to challenging this order and each day more people are joining, research is being done and contacts have been made, but things are not finalised as yet, but hopefully in the next week we would make a start. organizing something like this when most of the people are outside Australia and all over the place is the challenge, but thankfully we have our sponsors onboard who are Australians and working for us there.

dont know if one is pending or not, but a group of us are trying to challenge it.

I am part of this group who got affected by Cap and Cease and am really touched that so many people feel our pain here. that's the beauty of forums like this that it unites all kinds of people from all over the place who then share, in whatever way, the ups and downs of others. Actually, this cap and cease would not have hurt so much or seemed so unfair if they had done it to the whole group of Pritority 5, who were a very large number - approximately 31,010 - in 2012. According to a letter received in July 2012 when the new SkillSelect system was introduced, “As at 1 July 2012, there were approximately 15,500 family sponsored skilled migration cases representing approximately 31,010 applicants in Priority Group 5 awaiting allocation.” If, according to their figures, there were 31,010 applicants in Priority Group 5 in July 2012, and 15,510 were independent ones who are mostly cleared, and out of the remaining 15,500 family sponsored, more than half were onshore applicants, so that leaves roughly less than 7000-6000 applicants in GSM176 & 475, who are now affect by this ‘Cap and Cease’ order. The actual number of applications affected by ‘cap and cease’ has not been disclosed officially. They processed onshore independent skilled ones in 885 and some onshore family sponsored 886, then almost all offshore independent ones in 175 in the last one year and are currently finishing the onshore family sponsored 886. Feel good for these people, their wait was over so we thought that our wait too will come to an end because each year during the last few months - March to June - they were processing a few thousand applicants in the queue. when everyone was getting a chance, we thought our chance would also come and Never expected they would do this if they didn't do this to others in the category. Now that they had reached the end of the queue with only offshore family sponsored 176 and 475, and a handful of independent 175s remaining, they announced they will not do so any more and applied the order 'retroactively'. Why were others in the same Category 5, with the same set of skills and even family sponsorship – GSM 885, 886, 496 and most 175 – processed and not GSM 176, 475 and the remaining 175? If Family sponsorship is such an undesirable thing then they should have specified it when we applied or shouldn't have offered this option. many of us would have opted to lodge an independent application then, we thought showing family ties would simply speed up things! In the last many years, every migration policy change was done after announcing it in advance and the older applications were not deemed void in any way, so why now? and as for having done this Cap and Cease before too in 2010, well they did but fewer people were affected and they could easily lodge new applications because the requirements had not changed much and they didn't wait so long, basically all they lost was money - but not time and opportunity as in our case. so there was no uproar or attempt to challenge/change it. Applying again is not easy as so many occupations are off the SOL and losing 7 years due to DIBP makes us lose points for age too. Common Laws work on Precedent, someone has to set a Precedent - we are trying to do so. This was just to give a clear picture of our case to the people here. hope this will make you understand where we are coming from and heading to. You don't have to agree, but you can wish us luck... that's all I ask. for those interested in reading up more about it, they can do so at Inside Story, SBS and Sydney Morning Herald. Good day!

Any more 175, 176 and 475 still there who have not contacted us? pls post here and join our campaign against this Cap and Cease

Thank you for your input, this is really helpful, it lets us add to our research, we would welcome more research like this, we are also doing it as we plan to challenge it .... they can decide what they want to do but we have the right to raise our voice against DIBP for not even looking at our applications while others in our similar circumstances were granted. BTW I have my own research to share with you, After this article was published, the Migration Institute of Australia contacted Inside Story to say that it has obtained expert legal opinion that the legislative power Senator Cash used to cease and refund the visa applications is not valid. According to this opinion, Section 85 of the Migration Act 1958 only allows the minister to determine the number of visas that will be granted in a financial year. Remaining applications are usually “queued” for allocation in later years. The Explanatory Statement to the Minister’s Determination attempts to convert the unallocated applications to the status of “never being made” using section 39(2) of the Act. The legislative authority under section 85 does not have the power to “kill” outstanding applications. To have this effect, the section 39 power to “cap and cease” needed to be expressly stated in the Ministerial Determination (which it was not). As a result, the MIA believes that the minister will have to make a new legislative instrument if the government wants to cease outstanding visa applications in the affected subclasses.