IMMIGRATION NEWS AILS logo small                
4th September 2012
Volume 225

 Subscribe To Our Newsletter

In This Issue
Crisis in Sponsorship Update
Dear students, 


Welcome to the latest edition of IMMIGRATION NEWS and to the new subscribers. This free service is brought to you by Australian Immigration Law Services. You can subscribe using the link on the right hand side or by visiting our website. Please feel free to forward this e-mail to any of your friends.


Today we keep you informed about the ongoing Crisis in Sponsorship where hundreds of former international students still find themselves in limbo while DIAC and the States bicker about who is to blame.


Crisis in Sponsorship - Update

We have to wonder about the secret meetings taking place between DIAC and the Sponsoring States

The ongoing mess regarding DIAC failing to recognise state sponsorship Form 1100 if it did not reach their office by the 1st July 2010 continues unresolved.


In our newsletter Volume 222, we reported on the issue of how DIAC had sabotaged the applications of hundreds of former international students by not accepting their sponsorship approval letters.


In Volume 223 we provided an update noting the statement released by the NSW Government, Department of Trade and Investment on their web site regarding the affected 487 visa applicants.


Mysteriously only two days after our newsletter was published the NSW government withdrew this announcement.


Fortunately we did print it out before it was withdrawn so for those who could not find the link in that newsletter, here is a scanned copy.


We did call NSW and ask them why they withdrew the announcement and they attempted to back peddle by stating that it is up to the individual areas to provide the requirements for sponsorship. They refused to answer questions about their web publication other than to say that it is now out of date.  


Out of date in a few days? Makes you wonder if they know what they are doing.


We assume from this comment that NSW is trying to wipe their hands of the issue and passing the buck back to the original areas.


We contacted a number of regions to clarify what their requirements will be regarding the affected students and it seem that some have allowed sponsorship applications which do not meet the 6 month residency requirement that NSW had advised.


There are also a number of students apparently affected by the Hunter Region office apparently not sending the Form on time. We contacted the manager at this center and she said that if the applicants sent the TRN or CLS file number on time then this region sent the Form 1100 to DIAC. However the affected students claim they did send their TRN numbers to Hunter just after lodging their visa applications. We will look more into this in a later newsletter.


We then contacted NSW and asked them what they can do to assist these students and if they had any care about them at all? Their answer was unfortunately not unexpected as they claim it is up to the individual regions to assist these students.


It may be a while yet before this mess is sorted.


In the meantime, it will be up to the individual applicants who are affected by this issue and perhaps their representatives to push this matter harder with the sponsoring bodies.


To this end Christopher Livingston of Migration Alliance has provided Migration Agents a copy of a letter as an example of how pressure may be applied. We have modified this example to suit a visa applicant who is struggling by themselves to deal with problem.


This letter does not constitute legal advice but it would be recommended where students have met a dead end with the sponsoring authorities. It may also be useful as a means of placing them on notice that you may intend to seek a legal avenue to lodge a claim of damages in the future.


If many people send in such letters, it may push the certifying bodies into action to resolve this issue before it becomes embroiled in complicated and expensive legal actions.


The example


"Dear XYZ,


I refer to the previous communication we have had in relation to my state sponsorship approval granted on the (date).


Your office has suggested that (name of certifying body) is not responsible for the failure to communicate with DIAC in respect to my (eg: 487 application) and not sending them the Form 1100 to them.


The "requirement" of DIAC in respect of the Form 1100 is not a requirement created by myself, the applicant, but was part of the formal arrangement on foot between DIAC and all authorised certifying bodies.


The simple fact of the matter is this, (name of certifying body) "sponsored" myself and then failed to notify DIAC of that sponsorship within a "reasonable period".


To my knowledge it seems that my case is one of many where your office failed to send the Form 1100 to DIAC within a reasonable time frame.


Our relationship is one of contract and you have been negligent. There is no fault on my side, the failure is yours.


The off list criterion which is the solution to this problem is also yours. The decision not to access that list for reasons of policy will inevitably cause a detriment to myself which will be actionable.


If this application is refused by reason of your continued negligence, intransigence and delay you will exacerbate the harm and the consequential damages which may be claimed.


May I suggest you turn your mind to this issue.... The Form 1100 is not an approved form...this requirement is ultra vires the Act and the regulations. The solution to this problem is to give to provide support for me in an off list nomination, or to sort this out with DIAC.


The solution is not to blame me for your negligence, intransigence , procrastination and delay.


I will tender a copy of this letter, ( email) in any subsequent legal proceedings regarding my application for damages as well as indemnity costs.

Please attend to this matter urgently."


The MIA had this to say in advising Migration Agents recently;


Many applications in the GSM pipeline have State / Territory Nominations that had not been confirmed by Form 1100 being sent to DIAC, or were for occupations no longer on the State Migration Plan occupation lists.

"The MIA has made strong representations to DIAC that these old nominations should still be accepted by DIAC.


The Department has now placed those affected applications on hold, pending discussions with State / Territory Governments on ways these old nominations can be confirmed. One possibility may be for an extension of the capability of State / Territory Governments to use "off list" occupations, but this is still being negotiated.


DIAC has said that the statements by some nominating authorities that they will confirm nominations if applicants live in their area for six months is not acceptable and is endeavoring to find a solution that will not be detrimental to affected applicants."


Archives, some light reading

Bored? Nothing to do in the dead of night when you can`t sleep?


Try one of our historical newsletters to read, that will do the trick.


For our older newsletters they can be found on our web site through the following link;


For the recent ones using the new newsletter format, they can be found here;





If you would like to join the other 9800+ subscribers then click on this link to subscribe to our newsletter 

or the link on the right above the Editorial.

Kind regards,


Karl Konrad
Managing Director


Jee Eun HAN, Executive Manager     

Australian Immigration Law Services

MARN: 9904238, 0850073 

AILS stuff photo
 At Australian Immigration Law Services (AILS), we offer professional advice and practical solutions to all migration matters. Our team of licensed agents and consultants specialise in various areas of immigration law, such as skilled migration, business, family, and reviews.











I cannot remember such an issue arising such as this one involving the sponsorship approvals being rejected by DIAC. I also cannot remember where a government department releases a statement on their official web site and then a few days takes it off saying it is no longer valid. It only goes to demonstrate that both DIAC and the State governments  have no idea what they are doing to resolve this issue.


There are a number of questions regarding this which remain unanswered;


 What was the cutoff date where the Form 1100 would not be accepted by the sponsoring bodies?


What is the definition of "promptly"? DIAC insists that the DIAC Form 1100 had to reach them, "promptly" after an applicant lodged their visa application.


DIAC was well aware that in many cases in the processing of these files, agents have to chase sponsoring bodies to send of Form 1100. This was often done at the request from the case officers as they did not have the Form 1100 in the applicants file. Why was  no information released publicly or to the authorized agents or to applicants, whereby DIAC created a critical cutoff date that would have to be adhered to make the nomination valid?


Please provide an
explanation as to why the ASPC, knowing this problem was going to arise at a later date, left it so late to notify applicants that a problem existed in their files?


 Would not DIAC have a duty of care to notify applicants of
a policy change that would affect their applications possibility of being successful?


 Why was this policy change not put into the Procedural Advice


To date we have exercised a degree of patience to see if DIAC was genuine in resolving this issue. I would have to say now that they are obviously not.

We are now in the process of lodging these questions to the Minister and demanding to know why the previous Director of the GSM program failed to answer any of them. There are ways to push the issue to ensure accountability and our office will ensure those responsible at DIAC will provide an answer to the public.







Karl Konrad

Managing Director 

Karl Konrad








Han Photo with Jacket
Executive Manager
Jee Eun Han





Australian Immigration Law Services  

phone: 61 2 92791991 | fax: 61 2 9279 1994
email: | website: 


 Level 13, 37 York Street Sydney NSW 2000

Disclaimer and Copyright

IMMIGRATION NEWS is intended to provide general information on migration issues and does not constitute legal advice and no responsibility is accepted by Australian Immigration Law Services (AILS) for the accuracy of material appearing in IMMIGRATION NEWS.


People seeking advice on migration law should seek advice from a registered migration agent
 and you should be aware that the law can change tomorrow without notice so you have the responsibility to keep up to date.
 The copyright of IMMIGRATION NEWS belongs to Australian Immigration Law Services (AILS) and no part of IMMIGRATION NEWS is to be reproduced by any means without the written consent of AILS. Australian Immigration Law Services is a trading name licensed to AILS INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD