Tang Law Recognized Among the Top 3 Employment Lawyers in Perth by ThreeBestRated

Blog & Articles, News, Tang Law , ,

We are thrilled to announce that Tang Law has been named one of the Top 3 Employment Lawyers in Perth, WA by ThreeBestRated! This recognition is a testament to our commitment to providing outstanding legal services and our dedication to helping clients navigate complex employment matters with confidence and expertise.

Why This Recognition Matters

Each year, the team at ThreeBestRated conducts an in-depth evaluation of local businesses across various industries, selecting the top providers based on a rigorous 50-Point Inspection. This comprehensive review covers everything from service quality and reputation to client satisfaction and professionalism. We are honored that our dedication to excellence has earned us a spot on this prestigious list.

Our Commitment to Excellence in Employment Law

At Tang Law, we understand that employment issues can significantly impact both individuals and businesses. Our team is passionate about helping clients resolve workplace disputes, understand their rights, and achieve fair outcomes. This award reflects our team’s hard work, expertise, and the trust our clients place in us every day.

Thank You to Our Clients and Community

We extend our heartfelt gratitude to our clients, partners, and community members for their continuous support. It is your trust in us that inspires our team to strive for excellence in all that we do.

For more information, or if you need assistance with an employment-related matter, please don’t hesitate to reach out to our team. We are here to support you with compassionate, expert legal guidance.

More information can be found here: https://threebestrated.com.au/employment-lawyers-in-perth-wa

1 July 2024 Migration Law Changes

Blog & Articles, Migration Law

On 11 December 2023, the Australian Government announced proposed changes to the Australian migration program under their Migration Strategy.

The purpose of the changes is to return migration levels to normal, strengthen the community and improve the living standards of Australians.

As part of the Migration Strategy, several important changes came into effect on 1 July 2024. These include:

 

A. Fee increases for visas, appeals and citizenship applications

Visa application fees were increased based on the forecast Consumer Price Index (CPI). For example,

  • A Partner visa application fee has increased from $8,850 to $9,095; and
  • A Student visa application fee for main applicants has increased from $710 to $1,600.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal appeal fees also increased from $3,374 to $3,496. This does not include appeals relating to character and protection visas.

 

B. Student visa validity changes

From 1 July 2024, persons who hold the below-listed visas will be prevented from lodging a Subclass 500 Student visa whilst in Australia:

  • Subclass 403 – Domestic Worker Stream
  • Subclass 426 – Domestic Worker (Temporary)
  • Subclass 485 – Temporary Graduate
  • Subclass 600, 601, 602 and 651
  • Subclass 771 – Transit
  • Subclass 988 – Maritime Crew
  • Subclass 995 – Diplomatic – primary visa holder only

 

C. Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa change in stream names, reduced age limit, and validity periods

The following amendments have been made to the Subclass 485 visa:

    1. New stream names have been introduced to replace the previously named streams which include:
      • Post-Vocational Education Work stream which replaced the Graduate Work stream; and
      • Post-Higher Education Work stream which replaced the Post-Study Work stream.
    2. The Replacement Stream is no longer available to applicants who held a Subclass 485 visa and lost time on their original visa due to COVID-19 travel restrictions.
    3. The age to apply for a Subclass 485 visa has been reduced to 35 years or younger. For Hong Kong or British National Overseas passport holders and for those who have completed a Masters (research) or PhD the age limit is 50 years old.
    4. Applicants who held their first Student visa after 16 November 2011 can now apply for the Subclass 485 visa under the Post-Higher Education Work stream.
    5. Applicants who have studied and lived in a regional area are still able to apply for the Subclass 485 visa under the Post-Higher Education Work stream provided they meet the visa criteria.
    6. The visa validity period for a Subclass 485 visa under the Post-Vocational Education Work stream will be 18 months.For the Post-Higher Education Work stream the validity period will depend upon the qualification completed and whether the applicant is a Hong Kong and British National Overseas passport holder or an Indian national.The general validity period for the below-completed qualifications is as follows:
      • Bachelor degree (including honours) – up to 2 years
      • Masters (coursework and extended) – up to 2 years
      • Masters (research) and doctoral degree (PhD) – up to 3 years.

If the applicant is a Hong Kong and British National Overseas passport holder they can stay for up to 5 years. Indian nationals can also stay for up to 4 years depending on the qualification completed.

 

D. Working Holiday visa expansion for UK citizens; Work and Holiday visa now available to Filipino nationals

UK passport holders can now apply for their second and third Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visas without having to meet the “specified work” requirement.

Filipino nationals can now apply for a Subclass 462 (Work and Holiday) visa provided they meet the qualification and visa criteria. 

 

E. Increase to the Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold (TSMIT) for employer-sponsored visas such as the Subclass 482, 186 and 494 visas

The TSMIT has increased from $70,000 to $73,150.

This new increase will apply to Nomination applications lodged after 1 July 2024.

 

F. Work condition changes to employer-sponsored visas such as the Subclass 457, 482 and 494 visas

Applicants who currently hold one of the above visas or have been granted a 482 or 494 visa after 1 July 2024 can cease to work with their current employer for up to 180 days but no more than 365 days during their visa period. They can also work for any other employer in any occupation during this period to financially support themselves whilst they look for another business sponsor in Australia if they decide to continue to stay in Australia.

 

G. Changes to Partner visas and family violence provisions

The wording of the family violence provisions available to applicants has changed from “suffered” family violence to “experienced” family violence.

Applicants who hold a Subclass 300 (Prospective Marriage) visa who are in Australia and have not married their sponsor can now access family violence provisions to be granted a Subclass 820/801 (Partner) visa.

 

H. New Workplace Justice Visa

A new stream under the Subclass 408 (Temporary Activity) visa will be available to applicants to remain in Australia to undertake a workplace justice activity with no sponsorship needed.

 

I. Closure of some visas and pathways

Applications for the Subclass 476 (Skilled-Recognised Graduate) visa and the Subclass 485 Specialist Qualifications pathway will no longer be open to applicants from 1 July 2024.

 

J. Changes to policy on visa health requirements

The Significant Cost Threshold for most visas has been increased from $51,000 to $86,000.

 

If you have any questions about these changes, or are looking to get advice regarding your visa options and migration pathways tailored to your specific situation, please contact us to schedule an appointment with one of our dedicated and friendly migration lawyers.

Recent Federal Court of Australia Decision may Impact Validity of Notification Letters from the Department of Home Affairs

Blog & Articles, Immigration Law, Migration Law, Tang Law

On 9 May 2023 Justice Markovic handed down a decision in the Federal Court of Australia on the question of when a person is deemed to have received notice of a decision to refuse a visa application by the Department of Home Affairs (Department).

In the decision of Sandor v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2023] FCA 434, the Judge found that Mr Sandor had not been properly notified by the Department of the decision to refuse his Student visa application. As there had been no valid notification of the decision, the time to lodge an application for review to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) had not yet commenced to run.

Mr Sandor had appointed a registered migration agent as his authorised recipient of correspondence sent by the Department in relation to his Student visa application. On 13 February 2018 a delegate of the Department sent an email to the migration agent, attaching a letter notifying the applicant of the decision to refuse the Student visa application and the reasons for the decision (Notification Letter).

Mr Sandor unfortunately failed to lodge an application for review to the AAT within 21 days of the Department’s decision. He lodged an application to the AAT out of time. As such, the AAT found that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the application for review.

At first instance, the Judge in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia held that the AAT had validly found that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the matter.

However, on appeal to the Federal Court of Australia, Mr Sandor was successful. Justice Markovic found that there had been invalid notification of the delegate’s decision as the notification failed to comply with the elements of section 66(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) because the Notification Letter did not completely or clearly include all relevant information required for Mr Sandor to calculate the time in which an application for review to the AAT can be made. The Notification Letter failed to provide any detail of when the letter was sent by email to Mr Sandor’s registered migration agent. The failure to include the date on which the Notification Letter was transmitted to the migration agent resulted in an invalid notification of refusal.

This is a significant decision as applicants who have failed to apply for review to the AAT within the relevant timeframe may find that the notification of decision was invalid and they may yet be able to apply for review to the AAT.

Australian Minister for Home Affairs Announced “A New Migration System”

Blog & Articles, Immigration Law, Migration Law, Tang Law

“Focus is on quality and skills. It is not about bigger population or more people, the new direction will have smaller migration program over time.”
“Our current migration system is broken and unfair.”

The new direction emphasizes ending the “ad hoc” and “piecemeal” approach to the Australian migration systemes and seeks to establish a redesigned system that attracts skilled individuals. The proposed reforms include restructuring temporary skilled migration, reducing bureaucracy, ensuring the right outcomes for migrants in Australia, and restoring Australian values. This article provides an overview of the proposed directions and immediate changes announced by the Minister.

SUMMARY
• Migration Program will be simplified and move away from specific occupation lists, but will have a broader skill list.
• Points test for PR will stay, but “bar” will be lifted.
• Income threshold for skilled migration of $53,900 is outdated. Increase to $70,000 on 1 July 2023.
• Welcome international students, but tightening up and lifting standards to make sure good students are actually here to study.

Restructure temporary skilled migration
To address the current challenges and streamline the temporary skilled migration program, the proposed reforms outline three (3) new pathways for temporary skilled migrants. These include:
a) Fast and simple pathway for highly specialized skills
b) Mainstream skilled pathways based on proper evidence of labour skill shortages. (Proposed increase income threshold from $53,900 to $70,000 p.a.)
c) Essential industry -But will tackle exploitation and “fake students” who are here to work.
Recognizing the need for a more efficient and responsive migration system, the proposed reforms suggested that the current “bar” for permanent residency (PR) is considered to be too low, and the test will be revised to ensure that only highly skilled individuals meet the requirements for PR.

Reduce Bureaucracy
Additionally, the government plans to simplify the visa system by reducing the number of visa categories and utilizing data-driven insights to determine areas where particular skills are required. These changes aim to streamline the application process and align migration with the needs of the Australian job market.

Right Outcome for Migrants in Australia
It was suggested that Australia needs to better plan for population increase. There will be increased flexibility for migrants to move employers and enforce their workplace rights. Simpler pathways will also be established for international students to become permanent, ensuring that high-performing students can continue to stay in Australia. However, stricter measures will be implemented to ensure that only genuine students are allowed entry into the country, raising the standards and tightening regulations.

Restore Australian Value
• Strengthen integrity by increasing monitoring to prevent exploitation.
• Stricter governance on migration agents and education agents.
Addressing concerns related to exploitation, the proposed reforms emphasize the strengthening of integrity measures by increasing monitoring. Stricter governance of migration agents and education agents will be applied to ensure compliance with regulations.

IMMEDIATE CHANGES
• From 1 July 2023: Minimum income threshold increases to $70,000 p.a.
• By end of 2023: Current temporary workers and all skilled workers will have pathway to PR.

BUSINESS MIGRATION PROGRAM
No mention was made about the current business and investment visa program in the announcement.
However, during Q & A, the Minister mentioned that Australia has enough capital. The focus is on the quality of skilled people. There will be changes to the 188 visa program, focused on quality of skilled entrepreneurs and drivers of economic growth, rather than simply their financial capital.

Importance of recent Federal Court decision Pearson v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] FCAFC 203

Blog & Articles, Immigration Department of Australia, Immigration Law, Migration Law

Under Section 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth)(“Act”), a visa holder is subject to mandatory visa cancellation if:

  1. The person does not pass the character test because of the operation of:
    1. paragraph (6)(a) (substantial criminal record), on the basis of paragraph (7)(a), (b) or (c); or
    2. paragraph (6)(e) (sexually based offences involving a child); and

 

  1. the person is serving a sentence of imprisonment, on a full‑time basis in a custodial institution, for an offence against a law of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory.

A “substantial criminal record” on the basis of paragraph (7)(a), (b) or (c) of the Act is where a person has been sentenced to death (7)(a), imprisonment for life (7)(b), or a term of imprisonment of 12 months or more (7)(c).

Until the Pearson judgment was handed down on 22 December 2022, an aggregate (combined) sentence of at least 12 months’ imprisonment has triggered mandatory visa cancellation.

Pearson v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] FCAFC 203

The Full Court’s decision in Pearson v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] FCAFC 203 found that an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of at least 12 months did not constitute a ‘term of imprisonment of 12 months or more’ and therefore would not result in a mandatory visa cancellation under s 501(3A) of the Act.  

The Full Court’s reasoning behind this is that mandatory visa cancellation should only be enlivened for the most serious offences, such as those attracting the death penalty, life imprisonment, a term of imprisonment of 12 months or more for a single offence, or sexual offences involving children. The Full Court held the view that the mandatory cancellation was “reserved for the most serious offences”.

Moreover, the Full Court also found that an aggregate sentence itself says ‘little to nothing about the seriousness of the individual offences’.

Consequences

The Pearson decision set a precedent that mandatory visa cancellation is not enlivened when the sentence imposed is an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 12 months or more. The consequences of the decision made in Pearson case are substantial and there are reports that up to 100 people have been released from immigration detention since the decision.

However, the Migration Amendment (Aggregate Sentences) Bill 2023 was introduced to clarify that s501(7)(c) applies in relation to a person sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 12 months or more, whether the sentence is imposed for a single offence or for 2 or more offences.

This Bill was passed through both Houses of Parliament on 13 February 2023 and will receive Royal Assent shortly, effectively undoing the precedent set in Pearson.

1 2 3 … 17