Australian Immigration Law: Visa Conditions, Sponsorship, and Cancellation

This article discusses various aspects of Australian immigration law, including visa conditions, sponsorship eligibility, and visa cancellation. It covers topics such as visa contravention, medical treatment, student visa application, and more. The article provides expert advice and analysis on each issue, citing relevant rules and regulations.

Running Head: AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note

1AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
Answer One
Issue:
In the given set of circumstances the issue is to identify whether Stanley has contravened the vsa
condition of 8101.
Rule:
It is worth mentioning that any person who applies for a visa in Australia is subjected to one or
more relevant conditions. Condition 8101 is one of the common provisions which restricts any
person who holds a visa to work in the territorial jurisdictions of Australia1. Engaging in work
can be defined as any activity which is undertaken by an individual for the purpose of earning
money. It can be mentioned that if any individual chooses to do volunteer work for less than a
period of three months to support their family at home, will not be held to have contravened this
condition. In case of violation of condition 8101, the decision maker in charge of the renewal of
the visa can cancel the visa2. However, the person who contravenes this condition will be given
the opportunity to explain the reason why he had breached it. The decision maker will
subsequently decide whether to cancel the visa or renew it. If it is assessed by the decision
maker that the circumstances due to which the person in consideration contravened the condition
8101 were beyond such person’s control, the decision maker will not typically elect to cancel the
visa.
Application:
1 Migration Regulation 1958
2 Migration Regulation 1958

2AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
By analyzing the facts of the case study, it can be stated that Stanley had been granted a visitor
visa (subclass 600) which was subjected to the condition 8101 as discussed above. However he
started working for Sydney Redfern Service (SRC), where he commenced paid shipments.
Therefore it can be inferred that he breached the condition 8101.
Conclusion
Thus, in conclusion it can be stetted that Stanley contravened visa condition 8101.
Answer Two:
Issue:
In the given set of circumstance the issue that has been identified is whether cancellation of the
Ian’s student visa will restrict him from applying him for medical treatment.
Rule:
It has been provided in section 48 of the migrations Act 1958 that a non citizen of Australia who
does not hold a substantive visa or whose visa has been cancelled according to the provisions of
section 109 (due to incorrect information) may be subjected to the regulations and has the right
to apply for a visa of a class which has been prescribed for the purpose of this section3. However,
such person cannot apply for a visa of any other class. Section 2.12 of the Migrations
Regulations 1994 prescribes the class of visas a person can apply for in relation to section 48 of
the Migrations Act 1958. In subsection 1(ca) of section 2.12 of the migrations regulations, it has
been provided that a person can apply for a Class UB visa for medical treatment4.
Application:
3 Migrations Act 1958
4 Migration Regulation 1958

3AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
By analyzing the facts of the given case study, it can be stated that Ivan’s visitor visa had been
cancelled by the Department of Home affairs in accordance with the provisions of section 109 of
the Migration Act 19585. However, Ivan had been detected with Lung cancer, therefore he can
apply for a Class UB visa for medical treatment in accordance with the provisions of section 48
of the Migrations Act 1958.
Conclusion
Thus, to conclude it can be stated that Ivan has the right to apply for a Class UB visa for medical
treatment.
Answer Three:
Issue:
In the given set of circumstances the issue is to give advice to Kevin in relation to his student
visa application.
Rule:
It is worth mentioning that Sponsored Family Stream in Australia allows a settled citizen of
Australia or any person who is a permanent resident of Australia to sponsor their relatives and
friends in Australia. However, it can be mentioned that the person who sponsors a relative of a
friend has to be an eligible relative. This has been provided in regulation .03 and 1.12 of the
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)6. However such person sponsoring a relative or friend can also
be family member of the person applying for a visitor visa or even a government official. It is
worth mentioning that the sponsoring person must be settled Australian Citizen who is above 18
5 Migration Act 1958
6 Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)

4AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
years of age. A settled citizen of Australia can be considered to be a person who has been a legal
resident of Australia for a period of two years. It has been further provided in section 8531 of the
Migrations Regulations that a person who entered Australia on visitor visa must depart with the
period of the visa. Condition 8503 states that a person, on visitor visa cannot stay In Australia for
a period further than the period of the visa.
Application:
By analyzing the facts of the case, it can be stated that Kevin had entered into the territory of
Australia on a visitor visa (subclass 600). It is worth mentioning that he applied for a student
visa(sub class 600). However, it can be stated that such an application is likely to be rejected as
per the conditions 8531 and 8503 that are imposed on visitor visas.
Conclusion
Thus in conclusion it can be stated that Kevin’s application of the student visa is likely to be
rejected.
Answer Four:
Issue:
In the given set of circumstances that issues are to identify:
 Whether a delegate from the Department of Immigration and Border Protection would
have allowed the sponsorship application of John , If he had received such application
prior to the 21th November?
 Whether John’s sponsorship of Molob will pose a problem for the recent sponsorship
application of John?

5AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
Rule:
In Schedule 2 of the of the Migrations regulations 1994 it has been provided that apart from
prescribing the immigration status of a sponsor, it is required for the sponsor to be settled in the
territory of Australia for the purpose of being deemed as a sponsor7. In section 1.03 of the
migrations regulations it has been provided that the term settled can be defined as an Australian
Citizen who has been a lawful resident for a reasonable period. Under Category 1, of the
migration regulations it has been provided that a sponsor has to be a lawful resident of Australia
for two years as at the time of the approval of the visa. Such sponsor is allowed to go for a short
trip up to four months at the time of approving the sponsorship. This can be considered to be the
reasonable time period. In category two it has been provided that if a sponsor stays outside the
territory of Australia for a period of two years at the time of approving the sponsorship, he has to
provide evidence of an employment which is going on, evidence of ownership of house or a
lease agreement, evidence of bank statements of funds held in Australia.
Further it has been provided in the Migration Regulations 1994 that a sponsor who has
previously sponsored a partner or a prospective marriage visa applicant cannot sponsor another
partner or visa applicant until 5 years have passed since the date of sponsoring the first applicant.
Application:
By analyzing the facts of the case, it can be stated John had been in Germany for a period of two
years prior while he entered into a defacto relationship with Elfriede. Therefore it is evident that
John cannot sponsor the visa application of Elfriede as he was not settled in Australia at the time
of sponsoring the visa of Elfriede.
7 Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)

6AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
Further, it can be stated that John had already sponsored a defacto partner, Molob in the year
2012. However, since five years had passed since the first sponsorship application he will not e
restricted to sponsor another partner.
Conclusion
Thus in conclusion, it can be said that the delegate of the Department of Immigration and Border
Protection can reject John’s sponsorship application and John’s sponsorship of Molob will not
pose a problem for the recent sponsorship application.
Answer Five:
Issue:
The issue in this given scenario is to identify whether the delegate correctly cancelled the visa of
Ace
Rule:
It has been provided in section 2.43(P) that minister in charge of the Department of Home affairs
can reject a subclass 050 visa or a subclass 051 visa if he is satisfied that the holder of the visa
has been convicted of an offense against the law of the state, Commonwealth, a territory or
another country8.
Application:
By analyzing the facts of the given case study, it can be stated that Ace had been convicted of
Assault causing bodily harm by the Sutherland Local Court under section s 59 of the Crimes Act
8 Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)

7AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
1900 (NSW)9. Therefore, in accordance with section 2.43(P) of the Migration Regulations 1994,
it can be stated that the Delegate had the authority to cancel Ace’s visa due to his involvement in
the crime.
Conclusion
Thus in conclusion it can be stated that the Delegate had correctly cancelled Ace’s visa.
Answer Six:
Issue:
The issue in this given scenario is to identify whether Marissa is required to notify the
Department of Home Affairs of her health condition.
Rule:
In section 104(1) of the Migration Act 1958 it has been provided that a non citizen who is living
in Australia has to notify the officer in writing of the new circumstances that have arisen which
might change the answer to a question on non citizen’s application form. It has been further
provided in section 104(2) that subsection 104(1) would apply to changes in the circumstances
before the visa is granted, if the applicant is in the territory of Australia at the time the visa is
granted.
Application:
Thus by analyzing the facts of the case, it can be stated that Marissa needs to notify the
department of home affairs about her health condition. Her health condition was diagnosed after
9 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)

8AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION LAW
her provisional visa had been granted therefore, she needs to notify the department of home
affairs according to section 104(1) of the Migration Act 1958.
Conclusion
Thus in conclusion it can be stated that Marissa needs to notify department of home affairs about
her health condition