LML6002 - Migration Law: Evaluating 'No Further Stay' Visa Condition

This assignment provides a legal analysis of the 'No Further Stay' visa condition (specifically condition 8503) under Australian Migration Law, referencing the Australian Migration Act and relevant case law, particularly Ramos v Minister for Immigration. The analysis focuses on the conditions under which a waiver of the 'No Further Stay' condition might be granted, emphasizing the requirement for 'compelling and compassionate' circumstances outside the applicant's control. It explains how the Ministry of Delegate assesses waiver requests, referring to regulations like 2.05(4), and clarifies the interpretation of 'compelling' grounds. The case study highlights that personal circumstances or situations under the applicant's control are unlikely to qualify for a waiver. The advice to Mr. X underscores the importance of aligning any waiver application with the specific requirements of the regulations and demonstrating a lack of control over the circumstances. This document is available on Desklib, where students can find similar solved assignments and study resources.

Running head: MIGRATION LAW
No Further Stay Visa
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note

1MIGRATION LAW
Letter of Advice
To
Mr. X
Melbourne
Australia
Sub: condition and exception of no further stay visa
Respected Sir/ Madam,
In Australia, there are many provisions included under the application for
granting visa and certain terms and conditions are applicable on the same with a purpose to
make all the related provisions and entry clear and reasonable1. Under the Australian
Migration Act, there is a provision on the No Further Stay application that restricts an
applicant to file another substantive visa application in Australia2. The visa conditions include
visitor visa, training and research visa and any other visa. However, there is a waiver to this
provision has been mentioned under the condition of 8503 that the delegates has the power to
waive the visa terms if any of the following grounds have been attracted:
 If any compelling and compassionate situation has been cropped up;
 The person should have no control over the situation;
 The situation can bring huge change in the life of the applicant and th nature of the
change should be permanent;
 The Ministry of Delegate should be satisfied that the newly developed situation is
different and can bring permanent change in the applicant’s life; and
1 Clibborn, Stephen. "Why undocumented immigrant workers should have workplace rights." The Economic
and Labour Relations Review 26.3 (2015): 465-473.
2 Crock, Mary. Immigration and refugee law in Australia. Federation Press, 2018.

2MIGRATION LAW
 The request of waiver should be made in the written form3.
All the necessary provisions have been discussed in the case of Ramos v
Minister for Immigration [2017] FCCA 2412, where the Federal Circuit Court of Australia
has correctly interpreted the grounds of 8503 condition and an outline of the request
application under this visa condition has been set out by this case.
It has been observed in this case that the applicant Ms Ramos has made a
request to the delegate to waive her 8503 condition and her request has been cancelled. This
case is quite appropriate to understand the terms mentioned in other provisions of the
Migration Act that are co-related to the current provision. The prescribed conditions that are
useful under this condition are prescribed in the regulation of 2.05(4) and the delegates are
empowered to reject any application if those conditions have not been attracted4. A close
interpretation of the term “compelling” has also been discussed in this case. It has been
observed by the court in this case is that if the visa-holder has been faced any situation that
has been cropped up after the visa has been allocated to him and the applicant has no control
over the situation, only then the applicant can secure his position for the waiver ground.
However, it has been observed that in case of any personal cause, the option for compelling
circumstances could not be taken into account. In the Ramos’ case, all the compelling
grounds that are shown and mentioned by the applicant are connected to her personal matter.
It has been stated by her that she had a relation before and her partner was violent in nature. If
her visa will be cancelled and she had to return to Philippines, where from she is actually
belongs to, will change her life. There is a provision mentioned in this case that if the
applicant can successfully shows the fact that she is unit for the travel or any of his close
3 Australia, Multicultural. "Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs." (2016).
4 Dauvergne, Catherine. Making people illegal: What globalization means for migration and law. Cambridge
University Press, 2017.

3MIGRATION LAW
relative is in critical condition and permanent damage could be caused in his absence, the
condition of no further stay can be waived. In her application, Ms Ramos has further been
contended that her new partner is ill and she is afraid that in her absence, her partner can face
severe attack. However, she has failed to show whether her absence may harm her partner on
permanent basis. Therefore, the delegate has rejected the application on the said ground.
A person under the condition of 8503 can take the plea that he needs a
protection visa and he needs to show the grounds based on what he is apprehending that any
misfortune can be happened to him5. However, the grounds should be reasonable enough to
pass an order for the grant of these waive6. In this case, Ms Ramos has confessed that her
previous partner was sadistic in nature and acted with her violently. She has been contended
that he will attack her again if she goes back to Philippines. According to the delegates, these
explanations made by Ms Ramos are not reasonable enough and she had failed to meet the
criteria mentioned to this effect respectively. Further, these stated grounds could no attract
the intervention power of the Ministry of Delegates that has been mentioned under section
351 of Migration Act7.
Further, according to regulation of 2.05(4), the compelling grounds that
have been raised must be cropped up after the visitor’s visa has been granted. Therefore, it
has been suggested in the case that if the applicant has shown any personal ground or if the
grounds mentioned by the applicant failed to meet the requirements mentioned in the
regulation, waiver could not be granted in that case.
5 Richards, Kelly, and Samantha Lyneham. "Help-seeking strategies of victim/survivors of human trafficking
involving partner migration." Trends and issues in Crime and Criminal Justice 468 (2014): 1-10.
6 Beine, Michel, et al. "Comparing immigration policies: An overview from the IMPALA
database." International Migration Review 50.4 (2016): 827-863.
7 Dauvergne, Catherine. Making people illegal: What globalization means for migration and law. Cambridge
University Press, 2017.

4MIGRATION LAW
It has also been mentioned in the case that the applicant should have no
control over the adverse situation that could be cropped up if waiver not granted to him. In
this case, Ms Ramos has been stated that her ex-partner is aggressive. However, from this
case it could not be stated that she does not have any control on it. She can take effective
steps regarding the same. Therefore, this provision has also not been attracted in this case.
Therefore, it is advised to you that you should keep in mind that all your
grounds are attracted the provisions of the same regulation and you have to rightly interpret
the provisions accordingly.
Regards

5MIGRATION LAW
Reference:
Australia, Multicultural. "Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs." (2016).
Beine, Michel, et al. "Comparing immigration policies: An overview from the IMPALA
database." International Migration Review 50.4 (2016): 827-863.
Clibborn, Stephen. "Why undocumented immigrant workers should have workplace
rights." The Economic and Labour Relations Review 26.3 (2015): 465-473.
Crock, Mary. Immigration and refugee law in Australia. Federation Press, 2018.
Dauvergne, Catherine. Making people illegal: What globalization means for migration and
law. Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Missbach, Antje. "Making a" career" in people-smuggling in Indonesia: protracted transit,
restricted mobility and the lack of legal work rights." Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in
Southeast Asia 30.2 (2015): 423-454.
Richards, Kelly, and Samantha Lyneham. "Help-seeking strategies of victim/survivors of
human trafficking involving partner migration." Trends and issues in Crime and Criminal
Justice 468 (2014): 1-10.