Keadaan yang memaksa dan/atau belas kasihan untuk Visa Rakan Kongsi Dalam Pesisir (Dokumen AAT FOI)

Apabila memohon visa Rakan Kongsi di darat, biasanya disyorkan bahawa pemohon adalah pemegang visa substantif semasa. Walau bagaimanapun, menurut Peraturan-Peraturan Migrasi 1994 (Cth), di mana pemohon bukan pemegang visa substantif (bermaksud pemohon adalah bukan warganegara yang menyalahi undang-undang atau pemegang visa penghubung) pada masa penyerahan, mereka mungkin masih layak untuk diberikan visa Rakan Kongsi jika mereka memenuhi kriteria Jadual 3 . Jika berpuas hati, Jadual menguatkuasakan had masa untuk pemohon membuat permohonan visa Rakan Kongsi mereka.

Walau bagaimanapun, kriteria yang ditetapkan dalam Jadual 3 mungkin sukar untuk dipenuhi oleh ramai pemohon yang berpotensi. Walau bagaimanapun, di bawah Jadual 3, Menteri mempunyai kuasa untuk mengetepikan kriteria ini di mana Menteri berpuas hati bahawa terdapat alasan yang kukuh untuk berbuat demikian.

On 17 February 2023, under Australia’s Freedom of Information scheme, the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) published guidance on the interpretation and application of compelling circumstances in relation to onshore Partner visa applications.

Catatan blog ini akan memberikan ringkasan maklumat yang diberikan oleh Tribunal Rayuan Pentadbiran apabila keperluan Jadual 3 boleh diketepikan. Walau bagaimanapun, jika pemohon memerlukan maklumat khusus, nasihat yang disesuaikan atau bantuan berhubung dengan situasi Jadual 3, mereka harus menghubungi Peguam Migrasi Australia hari ini yang boleh memberikan maklumat dan representasi yang berkaitan bagi pihak pemohon.

Applicants should be aware that in October 2024, Australia’s appeals and review processes underwent a significant transformation with the introduction of the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART), replacing the former Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). This change is designed to streamline decision-making and improve accessibility for applicants seeking a review of migration decisions. Although the ART is now continuing the work of its predecessor the AAT, the information provided by the AAT is still useful in understanding the complexities associated with applications involving Schedule 3 waivers. The Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) replaced the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) in October 2024. While the ART now handles migration review matters, the AAT's earlier guidance on compelling and compassionate circumstances for Schedule 3 partner visa waivers remains a relevant reference for understanding how decision-makers approach these applications.

[free_consultation]

Tempah Konsultasi

Jika anda berminat untuk mendapatkan lebih banyak maklumat mengenai visa, hubungi Peguam Migrasi Australia untuk berunding.

[/free_consultation]

Jadual 3 Keperluan

Di bawah Jadual 3, melainkan diketepikan oleh Menteri, pemohon visa Rakan Kongsi darat yang berpotensi sama ada perlu:

• Menjadi pemegang visa Diplomatik (subkelas 955) atau sebagai pemegang visa Tujuan Khas ialah ahli SOFA atau tanggungan mereka dan memenuhi kriteria 3002 
• Memenuhi kriteria 3001, 3003 dan 3004

Kriteria 3001: 

The applicant must make their Partner Visa application within 28 days after becoming an unlawful non-citizen or after an overstay.

Kriteria 3002: 

• Buat permohonan dalam tempoh 12 bulan selepas kemasukan yang menyalahi undang-undang atau tinggal lebih masa

Kriteria 3003: 

For criterion 3003 to be satisfied, all of the following must apply:

• The applicant became an unlawful non-citizen due to factors outside their control.
• There are compelling reasons to grant the visa.
• The applicant complied with the conditions of their previous visa.
• The applicant would have been entitled to a further visa.
• The applicant intends to comply with any conditions attached to a new visa.
• The applicant's last visa was not subject to a no-further-stay condition.

Kriteria 3004: 

For criterion 3004 to be satisfied, all of the following must apply:

• The applicant entered Australia unlawfully and has not subsequently been granted a substantive visa.
• The applicant does not hold a substantive visa because of factors beyond their control.
• There are compelling reasons for granting the visa.
• The applicant has complied substantially with the conditions of their previous visa.
• The applicant would have been entitled to a subsequent visa.
• The applicant intends to comply with any conditions attached to a new visa.
• The applicant's last visa was not subject to a no-further-stay condition.

Keperluan ini sukar untuk dipenuhi oleh mana-mana pemohon, dan akibatnya, pemohon selalunya berusaha untuk menunjukkan bahawa mereka mempunyai keadaan yang memaksa yang tidak diperlukan untuk memenuhi kriteria ini.

[aml_difference] [/aml_difference]

Prinsip umum untuk 'keadaan yang memaksa dan/atau belas kasihan'

Within the Migration Act or the Migration Regulations, despite being terms critical to the waiving of specific requirements, ‘compelling’ and ‘compassionate’ are not specifically defined. As a result, it is a contextual case-by-case consideration made by the Minister or the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART), informed by the context the phrase is used in and the purpose of the provision the phrases is located. When considering the applicant’s situation, all of their circumstances must be accounted for

Penggunaan 'memaksa' mengarahkan pembuat keputusan yang berkaitan untuk dituntut atau dipaksa membuat kesimpulan tertentu kerana keperluan moral. Penggunaan perkataan 'belas kasih' mengarahkan pembuat keputusan yang berkaitan untuk berasa simpati atau kasihan dengan keadaan pemohon. Walaupun istilah sering digunakan bersama-sama untuk kesan kumulatif, ia tidak perlu digunakan bersama-sama dan dalam keadaan ini perkataan lain tidak boleh dipertimbangkan. Oleh itu, apabila memaksa dirujuk, keadaan mestilah sedemikian rupa sehingga pembuat keputusan sangat diyakinkan untuk datang kepada pandangan tertentu.

Akibatnya, nampaknya pembuat keputusan yang berkaitan dikehendaki memenuhi ambang yang tinggi untuk mengetepikan keperluan Jadual 3 dalam sebarang keadaan tertentu.

Penepian dalam konteks visa Rakan Kongsi di pantai

Seperti yang dinyatakan sebelum ini, kriteria Jadual 3 yang membebankan boleh diketepikan di mana Menteri berpuas hati terdapat alasan yang kukuh untuk berbuat demikian. 

The purpose of this waiver was to recognise that there can be potential hardships suffered by an applicant that would result in circumstances where an applicant should remain onshore when applying for a Partner visa, rather than being forced to leave. The Department of Home Affairs guides decision-makers to consider why the applicant became unlawful in Australia and what the circumstances out of their control are.  Therefore, decision-makers should endeavour to consider all of the relevant circumstances of the applicant, including information available at the time of lodgement up to the time the decision was made. As long as the reasons exist prior to a decision being made, they are deemed to be relevant considerations for the purposes of determining whether there are compelling reasons to waive the various criteria.

Walaupun diakui bahawa terdapat keadaan di mana keadaan yang memaksa tidak akan ditemui disebabkan oleh ciri-ciri yang wujud dalam hubungan itu (seperti berapa lama perhubungan itu telah atau jika ia tulen), keadaan pemohon masih harus dinilai pada sesuatu kes. -berdasarkan kes. Tambahan pula, pembuat keputusan semasa menilai sama ada terdapat keadaan yang memaksa harus melibatkan diri dengan situasi itu sendiri dan memberikan semua hujah dan bukti pertimbangan yang tulen. 

Decision-makers are not required to consider international obligations or treaties when considering compelling reasons for the purposes of a Schedule 3 waiver.

Ultimately, decision-makers must not disregard substantiated reasons put to them, and must keep in mind that the purpose of the waiver is to avoid requiring applicants to leave Australia in circumstances where such departure would cause genuine hardship.

Common examples of circumstances that applicants have raised in support of a Schedule 3 waiver include: a child born of the relationship, a serious medical condition affecting the applicant or their partner, financial hardship that would result from departure, or a genuine long-term relationship where the applicant became unlawful due to circumstances beyond their control. The weight given to these circumstances depends on the individual case and the strength of the evidence provided. No single factor is determinative.

[kisah_kejayaan] [/kisah_kejayaan]

Bagaimana Kami Boleh Membantu Anda

As discussed above, it is possible for applicants who do not hold a substantive visa to have the Schedule 3 requirements waived when applying onshore for a Partner Visa. The legal framework governing these applications is complex, and the threshold for a successful waiver is high. Australian Migration Lawyers have the knowledge and experience to help applicants navigate this process, build a compelling case, and present all relevant circumstances effectively to decision-makers. Contact Australian Migration Lawyers today to discuss your situation. We are available seven days a week.