FourLion Legal
Landing Banner

Immigration

1st December, 2014

Facts:

  1. Our client was an Indian Student who travelled to Australia to further his studies.
  2. His visa expired and he applied for a further student visa to complete his studies.
  3. The application was rejected on the basis that he did not have sufficient funds to complete his studies because the case officer at the Department did not receive the correspondence and evidence sent by his appointed migration agent.
  4. An appeal was lodged with the MRT, however, the decision was affirmed.
  5. The MRT in affirming the decision denied our client with short additional time required to provide further evidence of finance.
  6. The MRT also noted that our client was not a genuine student.
  7. Our client came to see us with respect to appealing to the Federal Circuit Court.
  8. The application and affidavit was lodged.
  9. Subsequently upon receiving all of the necessary documents from the Department and the MRT, a further amended application and supplementary affidavit was lodged.
  10. The Department, based on our work in presenting our client’s case accepted that there was an error of law made by the MRT Member and forwarded consent orders with respect to the orders our client was seeking.
  11. The matter has now been referred back to the MRT.
Please follow and like us: