违反8202,签证取消案例

今天又一个客户找到我咨询签证取消的案子。南澳大学的学生,成绩不好,被南澳大学报了移民局。 我仔细研究了南澳大学发的警告信和Section 20 notice. 没有什么问题。她告诉我她还有个正在审理的572签证申请。问我她应该去上诉么?
我告诉她 如果你想赢这个case 基本上没有希望。但是如果你想完成学业的话,就现在不要上诉,拿着Bridging visa E,等到572签证拒签了以后再上诉。她一脸不理解。
我告诉她 MRT cancellation 的审理期限是半年之内。 MRT refusal 的审理期限是一年以上。 所以…
她恍然大悟。

There are some conditions to which the concept of substantial compliance has no logical application. Either the condition is satisfied or it is not: Jayasekara v MIMA [2006] FCAFC 167; [2006] FCAFC 167; (2006) 156 FCR 199 (Jayasekara). The Court in Jayasekara held by majority that the requirement of a certificate in the academic result component of condition 8202(3), as it stood when considered in that case, was one such condition.

不幸的是,她就是违反了8202(3) 所以根据上级法院的判决, MRT refusal 上诉也肯定没戏。

我还告诉她唯一的一线希望是Ministerial Intervene Under Section 351.

但是我觉得她的case 可以根据  “circumstances that legislation does not anticipate or clearly unintended circumstances or the application of relevant legislation leads to unfair or unreasonable result. “争取一下。

在最坏的情况下争取最好的结果也是我们移民代理的本质工作.

Advertisements
%d 博主赞过: