As found in the Herald Sun, 12 January 2022

The world No 1 remains in Australia but is not guaranteed to be playing the Australian Open as the government weighs up the decision to re-detain and deport him.

On Monday, Djokovic won a court hearing to have the decision to cancel his visa quashed.

Judge Kelly found the decision to cancel the visa was “unreasonable” but the situation is far from over.

Depending on what the Federal Government opts to do next, plenty of questions remain unanswered.

AHWC Immigration Law principal lawyer Maggie Taaffe speaks about the tennis ace’s chances of defending his 21st grand slam in the Australian Open, the possibility of a three year ban from Australia, and whether Djokovic could even sue the federal government for unlawfully detaining him.

CAN DJOKOVIC PLAY?

Absolutely he can play.

The decision to cancel his visa has been revoked, which means his visa is in place – it’s like nothing happened, he’s got a 408 visa.

But if the Immigration Minister exercises his discretion under section 133C of the Migration Act, his visa is then gone.

He would be back in that same situation of not having anything at all, and would go back to detention.

IS THERE A CHANCE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL STILL DEPORT HIM?

Yes, absolutely.

The Minister (for Immigration Alex Hawke) doesn’t have to give reasons when he exercises his personal discretion.

It’s in the Act – there’s no procedural fairness unless there has been some really out there failure.

WHY WASN’T HE RE-DETAINED ON MONDAY NIGHT AFTER HE WON HIS COURT CASE AGAINST HOME AFFAIRS MINISTER KAREN ANDREWS?

Because he has a visa, he’s a lawful person in Australia now.

He’s perfectly entitled to be in Australia.

Only if the Immigration Minister moved to cancel his visa, then he would be re-detained.

DOES THIS IMPACT HIS FUTURE RETURN TO AUSTRALIA?

No, it doesn’t at the moment.

But it could if the Immigration Minister moves to cancel his visa.

He would then be subject to a three year ban that could only be waived if there were compelling compassionate factors – and they don’t do that very often.

WHAT IS THE LIKELY OUTCOME?

I think the Immigration Minister might not cancel his visa.

There has been incredible public outcry and people suggesting he has been treated badly.

If the Minister is thinking about our international reputation, I think he will move not to cancel his visa.

CAN DJOKOVIC SUE?

This is an interesting question.

It’s possible he could certainly make a claim for compensation for being detained unlawfully because that was what the decision ultimately came to – the decision was procedurally unfair, it was unlawful.

WHAT IF HIS PREPARATION FOR THE AUSTRALIAN OPEN IS IMPACTED BY THE SAGA?

It would not be unreasonable for him to argue that.

I don’t think that’s too long of a bow to draw.

HOW MUCH DID DJOKOVIC’S COURT CASE COST THE TAXPAYER?

I wouldn’t put it past at least around $400k just for Djokovic’s counsel, then government lawyers no less than $50k (the government has counsel deals that reduce the costs).

Then there are the court costs, including daily fees and $3300 to make a migration application.

I think it would be about $10k for court fees.

(That’s a grand tally of about $460k)

IS DJOKOVIC’S CASE RARE?

The way Djokovic was treated is the standard in the way people get their visas cancelled.

They just cancel them willy nilly.

There’s no right of appeal to go to tribunal.

You have to evoke the jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit Court.

Someone who doesn’t have the means like Djokovic will just be deported.

Read the full article here.

As found in the Herald Sun – January 6, 2022 – 2:47PM

Novak Djokovic’s legal team faces a drawn-out challenge to appeal his visa cancellation. An immigration law expert reveals how the process will play out.

Maggie Taaffe, principal lawyer at AHWC Immigration Law, has outlined the coming days for the tennis star as his legal team plans to fight the federal government decision.

The immigration law expert said the first thing Djokovic’s lawyers would do was seek an urgent injunction in the Federal Circuit Court to prevent him from being deported.

“That’s essentially a restraining order to stop him being deported while they consider an appeal,” she said.

An urgent injunction is expected to be heard on Thursday, and if successful, would give Djokovic’s lawyers a few days to lodge an appeal.

Ms Taaffe said a person appealing a visa cancellation would generally be sent to immigration detention pending the outcome of a legal challenge.

Djokovic has been sent to a hotel, which has been classified as a detention centre.

The legal eagle said authorities also had the ability to grant Djokovic a Bridging Visa E, which would legally allow him to stay in Australia and be among the community, but would give him no working rights.

As to the back-and-forth between the Victorian and federal governments over who was to blame for the debacle, Ms Taaffe said the Commonwealth had “total jurisdiction making decisions about visas”, which were then managed by Border Force.

While it’s not known what visa Djokovic was granted, or on what grounds, she said there were some classes of visa where the state could support an application.

However, Federal authorities still had to grant it.

“Whoever granted his visa should have taken his medical claims on board and assessed those independently, not relied on the Victorian government,” Ms Taaffe said.

She questioned whether Djokovic himself had a hand in the to-and-fro fiasco.

“If he hadn’t made that tweet creating this complete furore (announcing he was coming to Australia and had a medical exemption) it’s possible he could have come in quietly,” she said.

Ms Taaffe also queried whether the proper procedure was followed in the case, which allowed Djokovic to fly to Australia.

“In terms of the legal process, you do wonder whether the correct legal process has been followed from the beginning,” she said.

Read the full article here.

As featured on SBS News & Podcast

04 July 2020

(Read or listen via the link below)

---

Travel restrictions and social distancing measures of COVID-19 are further delaying processing times for partner visa applicants within and outside Australia. According to the Migration Institute of Australia, just under half of partner visas lodged in the last financial year were granted.

Highlights

• Prospective partner visas holders are unable to enter Australia even after being granted a nine-month permit to stay.
• Processing times of partner visas are expecting significant delays due to lockdowns and travel bans.
• Few partner visa applicants are still able to enter Australia on visitor visas.

As featured on SBS News

07 January 2019

---

Australia’s annual immigration intake has remained at the centre of political discussion with Prime Minister Scott Morrison indicating it could be slashed, and more opportunities opening up for migrants in regional Australia.

Immigration took centre stage in Australia’s political discourse for the better part of 2017 with much discussion around Australia’s annual permanent intake and the question of how to deal with growing overcrowding in Melbourne and Sydney.