University Migration Law Assignment: Visa Compliance and Cancellation

This assignment analyzes a scenario involving Narelle Patel and her violation of visa conditions under Australian migration law. The student identifies the Minister's right to cancel her visa under s 116 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) due to her unauthorized work as a receptionist. The assignment then explores the implications of visa cancellation, including the limited options for further visa applications under s 48 of the MA, such as partner visas or bridging visas after an appeal. It delves into the specifics of Bridging E visas, their conditions, and eligibility criteria based on different circumstances like judicial review applications and ministerial intervention requests, referencing relevant sections of the Migration Act and Regulations. The document also details the conditions associated with different bridging visas and the potential for work rights, highlighting that work rights are discretionary based on the Minister's decision in certain situations, and also requires the applicant to have made arrangements to leave Australia.

Running head: MIGRATION LAW
Migration Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1MIGRATION LAW
A
In the present situation it is clear that Narelle Patel has not complied with the rules
provided under condition 8010 and 8201 according to which she is not allowed to work in
Australia during her period of stay. As she has been found to work as a receptionist the minister
has the right to cancel her visa under the application of s 116 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)1.
Under this section general powers are provided to the department to cancel the visa in case a
person has failed to comply with a condition imposed on the Visa.
B
Under the provisions of s 48 of the MA, once a visa has been cancelled, the person has no
right to make a further visa application other than a few classes of visa2. These classes include a
protection visa or a bridging visa after filing an appeal against the decision of cancellation or a
partner visa. In the present situation it is clear that visa of Narelle Patel has been cancelled under
s 116 of the MA and thus she would only be allowed to apply for a partner visa or a bridging visa
after filing an appeal against the decision of cancellation.
In the present situation Narelle Patel would be holding a Bridging E visa. This is a form
of visa which is temporary in nature. This visa is provided when a substantive visa of a person
has come to an end and it allows the person to stay in Australia in a lawful way while they are
making arrangements to finalize immigration matter, leave Australia or are waiting for a decision
related to immigration. Once a person has left Australia this visa does not allow a re-entry. He
would be specifically holding BVE subclass 050 visa. Under Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)
1 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 116
2 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 48

2MIGRATION LAW
sub class 050.6133 conditions such as 8201, 8207, 8401, 8505, 8506, 8507, 8508, 8510, 8511,
8512 and 8548 can be imposed on a person who meets the criteria of subclause 050.212(6A).
Conditions are imposed on a visa pursuant to s 41 of the Migration Act4.
Answer 3
When a visa application has been cancelled, all bridging visa in relation to future
applications are also cancelled. Once the visa is cancelled the person becomes unlawful and have
to take an action to regularize or make lawful the statues in Australia. This can be done by
lodging an appeal in relation to the cancellation and applying for a bridging visa for the period of
the appeal. The application of the bridging visa allows the person to remain in Australia lawfully
whole the decision in relation to the appeal is made. In the provided situation Ms Patel can apply
for the getting a Bridging C visa. This is a temporary visa. The visa allows a person to Australia
for a temporary period. Ms Patel would have this bridging visa instead of A or B because she
does not held a substantive visa at the time of making appeal for the visa refusal or for the
bridging Visa grant.
Answer 4
In situation of a judicial review Ms Patel can apply for a Bridging E visa. In this situation
she may be provided with work rights only if she had work rights on the previous visa held be
her. However she did not have any work rights on either the visitor visa or the bridging visa and
thus she would also not be able to have work rights on the new BVE. She has to be a non citizen
who has cleared immigration under s 72(1)5. Under sub clause 050.212(3A) of MR schedule 26
3 Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) sub class 050.613
4Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 41
5Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 72(1)
6 Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) sub class 050.212(3A)

3MIGRATION LAW
she must have applied for a judicial review which is not completed. Both the conditions are
satisfied and thus she is eligible to get bridging E visa.
On the other hand a person who is seeking a BV with respect to the grounds that they
have made a ministerial intervention request under s 417 or 48B7 may have the right to make a
claim for BVE. With respect to this visa the work rights are discretionary based on the will of the
minister. In the present situation where Ms Patel makes an application for ministerial
intervention request she can get a BVE and her work rights would be based on the discretion of
the minister. She also has to show that she has made there required arrangement in relation to
leaving Australia for the purpose of BVE to be granted. Permission to work would be provided if
compelling and exceptional circumstances require them to work.
7Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 417 and 48B

4MIGRATION LAW
Bibliography
Migration Act 1958 (Cth)
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth)