Archived Discussion Topic

Disability and Immigration       started by Rumbush on 27 Nov 2006   (10549)
Message InfoMessage
From JacquiandAndy

To Byrnefamily

27 Nov 2006 7:55 PM
(47231)
HI I have uplifted this for you, it should be very helpful to most people who are wondering about weight etc., http://www.iscah.com/newsletterlatest.htm ISCAH Migration Newsletter (Copyright 2006) Edition Number 101 Monday 20th November 2006 Hello everyone Welcome to the latest edition of our migration newsletter. This free publication is designed to keep you up to date with all the changes to Australian visa laws and help you with your applications now or in the future. If there is any topic you would like addressed please drop me an email to newsletter@iscah.com If you are receiving this as a complimentary copy with some migration advice, and you would like to go on our mailing list, please drop me a line to newsletter@iscah.com Similarly if you would like to receive back copies or unsubscribe, drop me a line. I have finally managed to find some time to play a couple of matches for my cricket club. Being president this year I thought I had better to make a show. After our top team lost their first four matches I was happy to say they won a couple of games with me playing. I am less happy to say they won DESPITE me rather than because I played well. My performances could be best described as, well
From Gollywobbler

To Rumbush

28 Nov 2006 5:54 AM
(47273)
Hi Richard In addition to Steven O'Neil's highly helpful newsletter, Austlii and in particular the Robinson case in November 2005 might help you as well. It is here: http://www.austlii.edu.au//cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/2005/1626.html?query=Robinson%20+%204005 The Robinson case has been a breakthrough with the medical stuff and has really forced DIMA to re-think its whole approach to meds problems. It was getting a bit silly, with the MOC using generic criteria about the condition rather than considering the actual condition of the applicant in question. Robinson has proven that the generic approach is NEVER appropriate. Although the child in Robinson has a mild degree of Down Syndrome, not cerebral palsy, the way the decision-making works is the same. So it really depends on how much (if any) special help your daughter would need during childhood and what the chances are of her being able to support herself financially via employment in adulthood. Recently there waw a thread on another forum, started by a father in a similar position to yourself. His 10 year old son is registered blind in the UK. However, David Blunkett is blind too. Some blind people are able to live near-normal lives, do mainstream jobs etc, and the aids for all types of disability are improving all the time. So although this child is technically blind, there is no reason why he should not be able to train for something which would make him financially independent as he gets older. Initially DIMA tried to refuse the application without even asking for specialist medical and other reports. The father and their Panel Doctor joined forces and stood up to the Department. The PD was convinced that the child will be able to live a near-normal life and she was a great help, I gather. Together she and the father involved the right sorts of specialists, got reports from them and sent them to the Department. They changed their minds, the visa was then granted without fuss and the family has now validated the visa. There have been some cases involving people with cerebral palsy, but they all pre-date Robinson and should therefore be treated with caution. Following Robinson, a different decision might have been reached in some of these cases. Please see here: http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinosrch.cgi?method=any&query=Cerebral++palsy+%2B+4005&meta=%2Fau&mask_path=au%2Fcases%2Fcth%2Ffederal_ct&mask_path=au%2Fcases%2Fcth%2FFCAFC&mask_path=au%2Fcases%2Fcth%2FMRTA Some visa-refusals can be appealed to the Migration Review Tribunal. Others can only be appealed to the Court and the Court cannot consider the factual merits, nor can the Court call for further medical reports and a Review Medical Opinion. I know that there is no appeal to the MRT with the skilled 136 visa. I'm not sure about the rest. It would pay to get a referral to a solicitor or Registered Migration Agent with specialist knowledge of the medical stuff and a proven track record of giving reliable advice about this area. Regards Gill
From Gollywobbler

To Rumbush

28 Nov 2006 10:50 AM
(47298)
Hi Rich You will get nowhere talking to Agents in the UK because the ones who are really clued up about the medical stuff are all in Australia. Peter Bollard is the name on most lips. He is a solicitor and a Migration Agent in Sydney, and I gather that he does a lot of the Continuous Professional Development lecturing to Migration Agents about the meds stuff. Mark Webster of Acacia is another who teaches the others about the meds stuff, I gather. Parish Patience are Immi Law Litigation solicitors in Sydney. Diana Tong and Nigel Dobbie there are both said to be clued up on the Meds, and I have read cases where Diana Tong was involved, introduced some very clever ideas and won for her client. Steven Penglis at Freehills (solicitors) in Perth acted in Robinson and did so pro bono, for which I will never cease to admire him. Freehills are a huge international firm and their fees are probably $1000 an hour. Ms Robinson is a midwife. No way could she have afforded their normal fees, but Steven Penglis waived the fees, got on with it and won for her because he became convinced that the entire legal approach by DIMA was inaccurate and wrong. DIMA could have appealed to the Full Court against the Fed Court decision in Robinson. I thought they would do so and that they would get the Fed Court decision reversed. However, that did not happen. I think Blake Waldron Dawson advised DIMA in Robinson. Whoever advised DIMA (because DIMA use external solicitors for the big cases and the implications of Robinson are immense) presumably DIMA was advised that an appeal by them against the Fed Court decision in Robinson would not succeed. DIMA's response to Robinson has been to alter its instructions to the MOC, to make the MOC aware that the Court will not accept notions about, 'The child has Down's so we needn't bother to read Dr Blogg's report, since this application is a non-starter owing to the child having Down's.' The MOC doctors are good guys. They had been told that the generic approach was The Law, which it was for a while. However, Steven Penglis has nipped that firmly in the bud and he is the guy you should be thanking, not me. I am merely an observer. Cheers Gill