Australia Forum banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi all,

A friend of mine here lost his partner (sponsor of his visa) not so long time ago. He’s been on 820 for a couple of months.

The offical site states an applicant can still be eligible for 801 in case a sponsor passed away, if there are evidence of developed closed ties in Australia.

The first question is, what an examples are of “close ties”?
In this case, an applicant owns a car; a pet, which was adopted from a shelter by an applicant and his deceased partner and it has a medical conditions one of them is an animal can’t travel by plane. My husband (an Australian citizen) is willing to write a stat declaration saying the guy is a good friend of ours; I could write it as well, but I’m on 820 myself, would it have any value?
Considering what I have written above, can it be considered as close ties?

Another question is, if an assistance required, what kind of specialist an applicant needs to talk to? Should it be MARA agent or a standard family lawyer?

We would really appreciate any useful advice.

Regards
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,832 Posts
Here are some immigration department notes on policy that might help:

close ties
In assessing whether the applicant has developed close ties, officers should consider the extent to which ties have formed and/or strengthened over time. For example, a tie that existed at time of application cannot reasonably be said to have since ‘developed’ (that is, in effect to have become a closer tie) if the tie has not materially changed.
In assessing this criterion, officers should have regard to the following policy and procedure. However, they should not regard these as exhaustive and should assess claims on a case-by-case basis.
Business ties
In assessing this criterion, officers should take into consideration that, under policy:
• a business tie may include ownership of property in which the applicant has an ongoing and active interest and
• an applicant is capable of having developed a business tie in Australia only if:
o they have business partners or associates who are Australian citizens, permanent residents or eligible New Zealand citizens or
o that business operates in Australia or, if claim based on the ownership of property, that property is in Australia.
In assessing whether a business tie is close, officers may consider:
• the extent and nature of the activities of the business or the extent of the applicant’s active interest/involvement in their property and
• the extent, if any, to which the refusal of the visa would cause economic hardship to that business/property or to business partners/associates. For example, policy envisages that, if the business ties are indeed ‘close’, refusal of the visa would have a reasonably significant, quantifiable and detrimental economic impact.
Cultural ties
In assessing this criterion, officers should take into consideration that, under policy:
• ties of a cultural nature are envisaged as (but not limited to) the arts, music, or literature and
• an applicant is capable of having developed a cultural tie in Australia only if they participate in, or actively contribute to, cultural activities (in Australia).
It follows that, in assessing whether or not those cultural ties in Australia are close, officers should consider the extent (if any) of the applicant’s participation in or contribution to those cultural activities.
Personal ties
In assessing this criterion, officers should take into consideration that, under policy:
• such ties are envisaged as being family unit members, other close relatives (that is, as defined in regulation 1.03) and/or close friends
• for such ties to be in Australia, the relevant person(s) must reside in Australia and be an Australian citizen or Australian permanent resident and
• a tie is incapable of being close unless the applicant and the relevant person(s) have regular and ongoing contact.
In assessing whether the tie is close, officers may also have regard to the extent of the tie, taking into consideration:
• the applicant’s aggregate periods of residence in Australia and their age during those periods. Policy envisages ties that were formed during the applicant’s formative years as more capable of developing into close ties
• (if the claim is based on the presence of close relatives in Australia) the composition and disposition (in and outside Australia) of all close relatives
• the degree of support shown for the application by those close relatives and personal friends in Australia and
• the degree of emotional ties with (and/or dependence on) those relatives and close personal friends in Australia.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks. do you know who is better to ask an advice - a MARA agent or family lawyer?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Thanks. do you know who is better to ask an advice - a MARA agent or family lawyer?
A migration agent or immigration lawyer is most appropriate to give immigration advice. They'll know where to look in law and policy to help you out.

A family lawyer can only advise on australian family law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,126 Posts
Thanks. do you know who is better to ask an advice - a MARA agent or family lawyer?
Not all family lawyers will be MARA agents.

Not all MARA registered migration agents are lawyers (legal practitioners), but some are.

MARA registered lawyers (legal practitioners) are also qualified to give you legal advice and assistance, such as helping you prepare an application for a court to review a decision made about your visa application.

MARA registered migration agents specialise in visas.
(wrussell who answered you earlier is a MARA registered migration agent.)

Lawyers who also do migration court reviews etc., probably specialise in legal matters.

Some MARA registered migration agents who are also lawyers, may only do Visas.

I would assume that the important thing is to use a MARA registered migration agent, whether a lawyer or not.

mara.gov.au/.../what-a-registered-migration-agent-can-do-for-you/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Thanks. do you know who is better to ask an advice - a MARA agent or family lawyer?
A migration agent or immigration lawyer is most appropriate to give immigration advice. They'll know where to look in law and policy to help you out.

A family lawyer can only advise on australian family law.
Thanks. Will try
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,832 Posts
Legislation will commence on 22 March 2021 that will remove holders of unrestricted legal practising certificates from the statutory scheme governing RMAs. As a result, on that date, holders of ULPCs will be able to give immigration assistance without OMARA registration and will be removed from the Register of Migration Agents.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,832 Posts
Charge like a wounded bull, sting like a bee

By Richard Ackland

July 4, 2008



In ancient Hindu mythology there existed an infinite number of universes, each one having its

own set of gods, rules and ideals. The idea of "alternative universes" is a handy one, for as

C.S. Lewis and Lewis Carroll have shown, much escapist fun can be had when we move

freely from one "reality" to another.

The law is a bit like that. There's an earthly reality and a legal fantasy reality.

You could fill a large warehouse with all the papers, reports, tomes and investigations into

the way lawyers bill their costs and conduct litigation. Yet the whole system seems to grind

along in much the same old fashion, untouched by inspirations of "improvement".

In Victoria, a large law reform report on how to improve civil justice has been released. It

borrowed bits from Lord Woolf's civil justice reforms in Britain. In the Commonwealth

sphere the Australian Law Reform Commission produced a massive review of the federal

civil justice system. The Chief Justice of the High Court, Murray Gleeson, and the Chief

Justice of NSW, James Spigelman, have both railed against the cleverness of a system that

rewards delay and inefficiency with higher remuneration. Yet nothing really changes.

Lawyers' fees, or "costs" as they are referred to in the parallel universe, are at the heart of the

vice. It is costs that drive much of the energy expended by the great machinery of the law. It

is certainly not new that law firms have been found to bill up to six times the amount received

by the injured client in a settlement or bill $100 for sending an email to thank a client for

sending an email.

Ten years ago in Brisbane, The Courier-Mail reported an investigation of solicitors' bills in

which it was revealed that the overcharging rate could go as high as 98 per cent.

The head of the legal regulator in NSW, Steve Mark, recently said there needed to be a

thorough review of cost assessments, cost disclosures and overcharging by lawyers.

Will it make any difference? Not really. He's been unable to find any instances of

overcharging so far in recent cases that have come before him. The Court of Appeal threw

out the one matter where Mark did find "gross overcharging" by a solicitor, saying it wasn't

"deliberate".

In the fantasy world, the lawyer-run investigations invariably plug for three things in having a

stab at improvement: grittier management of cases by the judges, more alternative dispute

resolutions and better cost disclosure. In England, where Lord Woolf trotted out much the

same well scrubbed formula, it has since been reported (The Times, May 22, 2007): "As most

practitioners agree, the Woolf reforms have done little to improve things and in some cases

made the costs burden worse."

In fact, one of Britain's largest commercial law firms, Eversheds, found in its "access to

justice" survey that only 22 per cent of respondents thought post-Woolf costs were lower.

The reason is that despite attempts by judges to take a firmer hand, lawyers still run the show.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top