Legal Research
Cases
Amin and Migration Agents Registration Authority

Amin and Migration Agents Registration Authority

Case [2005] AATA 257 24 March 2005

Administrative Decision

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2005] AATA 257
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION   )    N2003/1590
N2004/193
  N2004/596

Re BONI AMIN

Applicant

And

MIGRATION AGENTS
REGISTRATION AUTHORITY

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Ms G Ettinger, Senior Member
Date 24 March 2005
Place Sydney

Ms G Ettinger
Senior Member

DECISION

Matter N2004/193 – The Tribunal affirms the decision of MARA dated 16 February 2004, to cancel the registration of Mr Boni Ami as a migration agent, and remove his name from the Register.

Matter N2004/596 - The Tribunal affirms the decision of MARA dated 17 May 2004, to refuse the application of Mr Boni Ami for registration as a migration agent.

Matter N2003/1590 The Respondent made submissions in its Statement of Facts and Contentions regarding the disposition of Matter N2003/1590, the decision of MARA dated 3 October 2003, the operation of which had been stayed by a decision of this Tribunal on 19 May 2004. In making my decision, I discharge that stay. Given my findings that Mr Amin is not a person of integrity, or is otherwise not a fit and proper person to give immigration assistance, pursuant to section 303(f) of the Act, and has not complied with the Code of Conduct prescribed under section 314 of the Act pursuant to section 303(h) of the Act, I consider that the preferred view is that pursuant to section 303(a) of the Act, I cancel any registration which may still be on foot as a result of the application in Matter N2003/1590.

Ms G Ettinger
Senior Member

INDEX TO DECISION
CATCHWORDS  4
LEGISLATION  4
CASE LAW  4
BACKGROUND  5
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION  6
OBJECT OF THE ACT AND CODE  7
STANDARD OF PROOF  9
THE COMPLAINTS  11
EVIDENCE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL  12
LEGAL ISSUE - Writing to the Minister on behalf of the Students  16
ISSUES OF CREDIT   25
Assistance provided by a Registered Migration Agent  27
The Clients’ Declarations  29
Similarities in the Statements of Messrs Paul and Mondal                   31
Mr Hakim’s Origins  33
Letters to the Minister regarding the Students  34
Clause 2.17 of the Code of Conduct  37
Mr Amin’s Statutory Declaration  39

CONCLUSIONS AS TO MR AMIN’S CREDIT  41
ADMITTED BEACHES AND BREACHES WITHDRAWN  43
Attachment A – Schedule of Breaches sought to be withdrawn           43
Attachment B – Revised Schedule of Admitted Breaches  46

GOUTAM PAUL  51
Background  51
Mara  53
Breaches Admitted  54
Protection Visa  55
Bridging Visa  56
First RRT Hearing  58
Second RRT Hearing  62
Federal Court  63

MOHAMMAD KHAN  65
The Refugee Review Tribunal  67
The Federal Court  69
Return of the Passport  71
JOHN SAHA  74

RUPAK SAHA  76
ABDUL HAKIM  81
THE STUDENT VISAS  83
Ahm Shamiul Alam  84
Kushal Khatiwada  88
Dihraji Malla  97
Dipesh Dewan  99
Shahedul Huq Khan  102

CONCLUSIONS REGARDING THE STUDENT VISAS  103
NEELA BADLU  107
CHARACTER WITNESS STATEMENTS  109
Tribunal’s Comments on Referees  111

CONCLUSIONS  112
DECISION  123
APPENDICES  125
Disputed Breaches concerning Rupak Saha  125
Disputed Breaches concerning Mohammad Khan  126

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Amin and Migration Agents Registration Authority

Details

AGLC: Amin and Migration Agents Registration Authority [2005] AATA 257
Case: [2005] AATA 257
Decision Date: 24 March 2005

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, a registered migration agent, contested the Migration Agents Registration Authority's (MARA) decision to cancel their registration. The Federal Court was tasked with reviewing the decision to affirm the MARA's actions. The central legal issue revolved around whether the applicant's failure to adhere to specific clauses of the relevant Codes of Conduct for migration agents was sufficient to warrant the cancellation of their registration. More specifically, the court needed to determine if such non-compliance rendered the applicant unfit and improper to provide immigration assistance.

The court examined the statutory framework governing the registration of migration agents, focusing on the criteria for determining fitness and propriety. It considered the nature and extent of the breaches committed by the applicant, as well as the seriousness of these breaches. The applicant had admitted to certain breaches, which the court found to be significant enough to impact their integrity and suitability to act as a migration agent. The court found that the cumulative effect of these breaches indicated that the applicant was not a person of integrity or fit and proper to provide immigration assistance. Consequently, the court affirmed the MARA's decision to cancel the applicant's registration.

In its reasoning, the court emphasised the importance of upholding high standards within the migration agent profession to maintain public trust and confidence. It noted that migration agents are entrusted with significant responsibilities, and their conduct must reflect the highest ethical standards. The court concluded that the applicant's admitted breaches, coupled with their overall conduct, justified the cancellation of their registration. The court found that the MARA's decision was well-founded and in accordance with the relevant legislative provisions.

The court ordered that the decision of the MARA to cancel the applicant's registration be affirmed. The applicant was directed to take all necessary steps to cease providing migration agent services and to notify all clients of the cancellation. The court's decision underscored the importance of adherence to professional standards and the severe consequences that can follow from breaches of those standards.

Orders