Killara

Ryan, can I ask this: when you assist a client and your MARA agent processes the visa application, who does the visa applicant list on their application form as the person who assisted them with completing the form? The correct answer it would seem should be you - as you help them to complete the form (or does the client ever deal directly with the registered migration agent?). If the client does not deal with the MARA agent but deals with you, then you should be listed in the visa application form as the person assisting them to complete the form, and then not tick the box which would suggest that the person providing assistance to complete the form was a registered migration agent. If the consultant who is not the registered migration agent assists the client to complete the application form, then the RMA's details should not be listed on the form as being the person assisting, as that is not correct and would be misleading the Department. You may not want to answer this because it is enquiring in to your business practices, and if you don't want to answer it, I respect your reasons for not answering it, and the comments I make then are just me expressing a view on the hypothetical situation where a visa consultant who is not a registered migration agent assists the visa applicant to compete the forms and advertises that a registered migration agent "processes" the forms. In my view it would be inappropriate for a registered migration agent to submit a form to the department which states that they provided assistance to the visa applicant in completing the form, if the assistance completing the form was actually provided by someone else.

The fact that you cannot apply for a (first) working holiday visa while in Australia is not relevant to the dependent child consideration. On a first working holiday visa application, where you must be outside Australia, if you have dependent children, you need to be able to satisfy the Department that those dependent children are not going to accompany you to Australia - this could be the case for example if the other parent, also outside Australia, has sole custody of the child and confirms that the child will not be travelling to Australia. The Department would need to assess whether they are satisfied that the dependent child would not later travel to Australia to be with the WHV visa holder (following grant). Any misleading by the visa applicant about that, could lead to the cancellation of the visa. But the criteria not to be accompanied by a dependent child would not amount to a breach of WHV visa conditions where a child is born in Australia during the visa validity, and this eventuality was not known or anticipated by the visa applicant at the time of visa application or grant.

The legislation provides that not being accompanied by a dependent child is a criteria of the WHV which must be met at the time of visa application and at the time of grant of the visa. It does involve a forward-looking exercise at the time it is being considered, to consider whether the visa applicant might be accompanied by a dependent child at some point during the visa validity. The decision-maker (the Minister or the Minister's delegate) must be satisfied that the WHV applicant will not be accompanied by a dependent child during the validity of the visa. If the decision maker is not satisfied of this - considers at that time that the WHV might be accompanied in Australia at some point by a dependent child, then the visa will not be granted. A WHV could be cancelled if it transpired that the visa applicant purposely misled DIBP when making the visa application (such as for example knowing at the time of the visa application or grant that they or their partner were pregnant and would give birth while they were in Australia). When the WHV is granted, it does not have a condition that the visa holder not be accompanied by a dependent child in Australia during the validity of the visa (but the visa could be subject to cancellation if the visa holder had misled the Department at time of visa application or grant). I will edit this post later and include a link to the applicable regulation (was going to link to austlii site - but it is down at the moment). [ http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013C01002/Html/Volume_4#_Toc374087524 for ComLaw link] It is true that there are many times when a parent of an Australian child can not stay in Australia - but that relates to the non-Australian parent not being able to apply for a visa, or their current visa expiring or being cancelled (for reasons other than having an Australian citizen child). But that is very different to cancelling the visa of a non-Australian parent due to having an Australian-citizen child. A WHV visa holder could have their visa cancelled if they had misled the Department at the time of application or visa grant (including not providing information to the Department, known to the visa applicant at the time of visa application or grant, about the visa applicant's circumstances).

I don't consider that a child born in Australia in these circumstances would be a breach of the working holiday visa conditions. The condition is that the Minister is satisfied that the visa applicant (for the WHV) will not be accompanied by dependent children during his or her stay in Australia and is set out in the regulations as a criteria to be satisfied at time of application for the visa and at the time of a decision being made on the WHV application. If it was not known or anticipated at time of WHV application and grant that he would become accompanied by a dependent child then I don't think DIBP could make out the case that there was any breach of visa conditions, and I would consider it highly unlikely that DIBP would seek cancellation of the WHV following an Australian citizen child being born - it would be perverse to cancel the visa of a parent of an Australian citizen child (and consequently expel from Australia the parent) on the sole ground that the parent is now accompanied by a dependent child - that child being a citizen of the country.

If you have sufficient evidence to show the genuine de facto relationship, then you can apply for the partner visa despite not meeting the 12 month requirement. You are then required to show compassionate and compelling circumstances. The birth of an Australian citizen child can meet this requirement for showing compassionate and compelling circumstances, but you will need to show how would be affected if the partner visa was not granted, so I would strongly recommend that you use a registered migration agent to prepare the visa application. It is possible to lodge the visa application before the birth of the child. Your partner will need to lodge a visa application before his working holiday visa expires - then a bridging visa will be granted so that lawful status in Australia is maintained while the partner visa application is being processed.

You need to know the visa subclass to know whether it is PR or not. Lots of sponsored visas are not PR - like the most popular sponsored visa - the 457. It is more than simply living together for 12 months that is required. (As hopefully you have already realised from reading the booklet). From the information you have given so far, neither of those are options I would recommend. You should not leave it to the last day of your visa to apply for another visa, but from the information you have given, a partner visa application now would appear likely to be refused. I would strongly recommend that you discuss your case with a registered migration agent - who will be able to then advise you of when you may be eligible to apply for a partner visa. From what you have said so far, it would seem that if you applied for a partner visa now, there would be a very strong likelihood that it would be refused, but discussing it with a registered migration agent will help you better assess your options (including whether you may in fact be eligible to apply now - but this will depend on answers to questions that the migration agent will ask you, and to whether sufficient supporting evidence exists). Essentially, more information is required, and a registered migration agent can go through that with you and advise you on the best strategy going forward. It may be that your best option will be for you to apply for a different visa first, before applying for a partner visa, and a registered migration agent can discuss your various visa options with you. If you lodge an application for an Australian visa while you are in Australia on another substantive visa (such as the working holiday visa that you are on) then you will be granted a bridging visa to allow you to remain in Australia while your application for the other visa is being processed. If you leave it to the last day of your current visa however, the bridging visa may not issue until after your current visa has expired. You would then become an unlawful non-citizen for that intervening period of time. This is something you want to avoid.

You would still be able to travel on the 457 visa because the 457 visa would still be in effect (it is not cancelled during the 90 days). However, if you were arriving back in to Australia close to the expiration of the 90 days, and if you had not already lodged the 189 visa application while onshore in Australia, then on arrival back in Australia close to the expiration of the 90 days, immigration may be concerned that you intend to stay on unlawfully in Australia, past the 90 days, and might ask for proof of onward flight before the expiry date of your visa. If you were to lose your current job, and also be travelling out of Australia in March, you may have other visa options for returning to Australia with work rights. Your situation is not straight forward. I think you are wise to be looking to safeguard your status in Australia with a PR application, but I would strongly recommend using a registered migration agent to assist you.

Agree that your daughter will be able to show substantial ties to Australia with the rest of you moving back to Australia as citizens. She should initially be granted a 1 year RRV. When she then spends 2 years in Australia, she should be able to get the 5-year RRV. 2 years after that if she is still residing permanently in Australia she will probably be able to apply for her Australian citizenship (subject to meeting residence requirements during those 4 years). Best of luck to you all with the move back to Australia!

The best way to check is to login to VEVO: https://online.immi.gov.au/evo/firstParty?actionType=query

If the visa has not been granted by the time you check in at the airport, the airline will not allow you to board the flight unless the situation can be resolved at the airport (this is what I think will happen). Airlines can process an Electronic Travel Authority (subclass 601) for Australia for tourism purposes - this is different from the e-visitor visa (subclass 651) that you applied for, but allows you to do the same - visit Australia for tourism; there will be a small fee charged by the airline for this (the ETA visa application charge is AUD$20, but EU passport holders cannot apply for this online - must be through travel agent or airline; the airline will do this for you at your point of departure). I have known this to happen to others in the past.

The visa will have an initial entry by date. That date will be 12 months after the date of your police check or medicals, whichever is the earlier. You will need to enter Australia by that date to validate the visa.

I think that you and your partner should really strongly consider speaking with a registered migration agent on the best option for you both.

If you are currently on your first working holiday visa, then you could do your 3 months of rural agricultural work and then be eligible to apply for a second working holiday visa. The age limit at time of application is 18-30 inclusive, I.e. before you turn 31. If you are thinking you might like to stay in Australia longer term though, then I would suggest that you discuss your options with a registered migration agent, who will look at your qualifications, employment experience, and other personal circumstances and advise whether you may be eligible to apply for a permanent residence visa. a student visa may be an option if you do want to study in Australia, but you should be aware that fees for international students are very expensive.

The "urgent" help is a bit over-stating it when you haven't applied and not planning to go for 11 months. Working Holiday Visas are often granted within hours of application (if straight forward application with no issues). Having sufficient funds is a condition which the Migration Act states must be met at the time that you apply for the Working Holiday Visa, so the application form will ask you to confirm that you have sufficient funds. You have very properly stated that you do not want to lie on the application, so considering that you are not planning on going for another 11 months, and how quickly this visa can be granted, you might want to wait until after the summer when you have saved up sufficient funds to comply with the visa application requirement. Is there some reason why you want to apply so far in advance? (For example turning 31 soon?)

Hi leanie! (Nice to see you on these forums again!) His spouse can apply for a partner visa. The spouse can apply now as he is PR and will be deemed usually resident in Australia (given the period you have indicated that they have lived in Australia). The visa application charge for applying for a partner visa in Australia has gone up a lot - it is now $4575 for the partner/spouse to apply in Australia. Processing time for partner visa applied for in Australia has been in the 10 - 14 months range recently.

The 189 is your best option, if you get the invite on 13/01/14. You may need to get separate bridging visa B's for your separate visits to Ireland while you are waiting on decision on the 189 if a decision has not been made on the 189. If you get an invite, you should expect 189 processing to take at least 5-6 months. The alternatives to 189 will likely cause difficulties for leaving / re entering Australia. Multiple eVisitor or visitor entries will almost certainly cause immigration to question you on your point of re-entry to Australia to determine whether you are a genuine tourist visitor. You will need to act quickly if you receive the invite on 13/01/14 to ensure that you have a bridging visa in time before your WHV expires. Fingers crossed for you for the 13/01/14 invite round! Good luck!

You may want to look at: http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/united_kingdom-royaume_uni/experience_canada_experience/index.aspx

There may be. I would suggest that you consult a registered migration agent if you wish to obtain advice on the visa options which may be open to you. A registered migration agent will be able to discuss your visa options fully with you, taking into account your experience, qualifications, and personal circumstances (after discussing these with you and obtaining the required details). It is difficult for people on this forum to advise what visa options you may have when they are unaware of the details of your experience, qualifications, and personal circumstances, etc. Usually not, but it is possible in exceptional circumstances. The employer who has offered you a job wanting you to work for 12 months when you have not even started working for them does not indicate exceptional circumstances and on the contrary indicates that exceptional circumstances most likely do not exist - they simply need someone who can work for 12 months, which you cannot on a WHV.

Hi Jurls British citizens have the same rights as Europeans in this regard. For me, it would be more difficult to bring my Australian partner to the EU country of which I am a citizen: Ireland, than it would to other EU countries. It would be easier for me to bring my Australian partner to the UK.... just as it would be easier for a UK citizen to bring their Australian partner to Ireland. It is easier for a UK citizen to bring their Australian partner to Ireland than it is for me as an Irish citizen. Vice versa: It is easier for me to bring my Australian partner to the UK than it is for a UK citizen. Thus, we have equal rights, under EU law. I'm not saying I agree with it. I'd prefer that it was easier for me to bring my partner to Ireland than the UK, but what we are basically arguing for there is for all EU citizens to have more rights - the right to bring their partner to the EU country of which they are a citizen. I think it is important that we recognise the distinction.

I did this also, but I did have four years of prior experience as a lawyer prior to arriving in Australia. I don't mean to dampen your hopes, but if all you will have done is completed your training in the UK, then I think you will find it difficult to find an employer who is both willing to sponsor you and to pay for your re-qualification in Australia... Simply because as opposed to the Australian law graduate, they would prefer the Australian law graduate to a UK graduate with no real experience post-qualification, and there are heaps of Australian law graduates without jobs. There is a lot of competition even among Australian law graduates for positions in law firms. I know people looking to do the same as you, but they have been told by recruitment agencies that there is no real prospect of them getting what they are looking for, and they are not even getting any real responses from law firms. If you can go to Australia and start the re-qualification process, you should be able to get a job in a law firm, which will stand you in good stead when you get admitted as an Australian lawyer, but don't expect that they will both sponsor you and pay for your re-qualification. That's a big ask, which for a solicitor from the UK with no PQE, I think unlikely to be able to get in Australia. Sorry. But don't let that dissuade you from pursuing your plan to re-qualify in Australia. If you want to live and work in Australia, it is a move definitely worth making, and for me, definitely was the right move yo make. I wish you every success.

Good luck melfb and Banksy with your move to Melbourne! Melbourne is a fantastic place to live and I'm sure you and your families will love living here.

Well, as you can see from my signature, I am both a lawyer and registered migration agent... but I agree that the registered migration agent that you contract to do work for your business who is a migration agent but not a lawyer should at least be able to inform you about the requirements of the Migration Act and Regulations, but feel free to give the Office of MARA a quick call if you would like to quickly confirm about displaying the MARN of the agent you contract with in your own signatures and website and whether that is acceptable to them.

Well, it says in section 283 of the Migration Act 1958: "(1) A person who is not a registered migration agent must not directly or indirectly represent that he or she is such an agent.... Penalty: imprisonment for 2 years" Use of a MARN is representing that you are a registered migration agent. MARNs relate to individual migration agents, not to organisations which enter into contracts with the migration agent. So, if it is not stated clearly enough in terms and conditions of a website, following what is in the Migration Act and Regulations is a very good and strongly advised starting point. Now, being based outside of Australia does mean that you are not bound by Australian law in this regard, but even apart from the Migration Act, both the UK and Australia have consumer legislation which prohibits misleading advertising. If consumers believe (as a result of expertvisas' use of a MARN logo and number on the expertvisas' website) that expertvisas' has migration agents that are registered with MARA, then there is the question of whether consumer legislation has been breached. I'm sure that expertvisas' clients are clearly informed of the fact that expertvisas is not registered with MARA but contracts a person who is in fact registered to act on their behalf.

Yes, that is correct. That was decided in the Surinder Singh case (http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/1992/C37090.html), and is now given effect to in UK Law by Regulation 9 of The Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/1003/pdfs/uksi_20061003_en.pdf) which treats the UK national in these circumstances as though the UK national were a citizen of an EEA member state exercising freedom of movement rights. For the UK Home Office operational guidance on this, see page 35 of the UK Home Office's guidance on the Regulations and Free Movement of Persons Directive: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/modernised/07-eea-swiss-ec/eea/eea-swiss?view=Binary#page35

All of this is incorrect. EU citizens have the right under EU law to live and work in any other EU country and for their spouse to live with them in that other EU country .. it is about one of the fundamental freedoms under EU law: the freedom of movement... so a Spanish citizen living in Sydney might not be able to bring their Australian spouse to Spain, but would be able to bring their Australian spouse to the UK. It is a European Union right of freedom of movement of EU citizens within the EU (which includes taking spouse) - that is why it is possible to take the non-EU spouse to another EU country but not to the 'home' country of the EU citizen (as the EU citizen is not exercising the freedom of movement right when in the 'home' country of the EU citizen). (see Directive 2004/38/EC http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:2004L0038:20040430:EN:PDF) and on the non-EU spouse not requiring prior lawful entry to an EU Member State: Case C127-08: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62008J0127:EN:HTML