We have particular expertise in Skilled, Business, Student and family migration. Our organisation has assisted thousands of people with Australian Immigration matters. Our services involve quick and effective application handling. We forward plan your migration process, offer expert advice on the migration process. We offer efficient dealing with all the Australian government and authority officials who make crucial decisions during the visa application process. Our experience and knowledge of migration law matters enables us to offer high quality and valuable assistance  in the complicated and ever changing field of Immigration Law.

David Stephens

David Stephens - Lawyer
  • Bachelor of Laws (NE)
  • Master of Laws (ANU)
  • Bachelor of Engineering (Mon)
  • Admitted to High Court of Australia as Solicitor and Barrister
  • Admitted to Supreme Court NSW
  • Member Law Council of Australia
  • Member Migration Institute of Australia
  • Member Migration Alliance
  • Member Institution of Engineers 1999-2018
  • Migration Agent Registration No: 9795466
  • Consultancy on Business Migration in Europe & Asia since 1995
  • Visa application and skills assessment preparation & processing
  • Detailed advice & case planning
  • Appeal management
  • Educational Services.
  • Business & Employment advice.
  • South East Asia
  • Middle East
  • Europe
  • United States
  • Africa
  • Sub-continent

Provision for a Code of Conduct for migration agents is set out in Section 314 of the Migration Act 1958 and is prescribed in Schedule 2, Regulation 8 of the Migration Agents Regulations 1998. All migration agents are required to be registered in accordance with Australian Law and must act within the Code of Conduct.

Some notable cases run:

Business Sponsored Appeal 060479861 [2007] MRTA 62: The Tribunal set aside the original decision. Successfully argued against government policy that contractors not be considered as employees for the purpose of regulation 1.20D. The business was approved as a business sponsor even though total wage bill was less than $4000.

Business Visa Policy 1301230 [2015] MRTA (16 February 2015): Business subclass 846 – Business Assets – The Tribunal set aside the original decision. Successfully argued against government policy. I argued that goodwill is a business asset even if it has not been purchased. The applicant was consequentially deemed to satisfy clause 846.213.

Labour Agreements: We successfully obtained Labour Agreement Status for a client who was previously refused three times with other agents. The positive outcome in 2021 was obtained with a very detailed submission using careful and thorough legal research, applying legal principles of administrative law, and a close attention to the specific facts of the client’s circumstances to present their situation and requirement in best light.

Student visa processing: successfully argued extension of the principle in Patel (FMCA) that credit cards can be accepted as suitable source of funds for the purpose of student visa applications. This application resulted in subsequent change in the Department’s procedures Advice Manual (PAM), which previously excluded credit cards as an acceptable line of credit for student applications.

Nomination for Skilled Migration: I was instrumental in saving more than 3000 visa applications from refusal due to a new department policy that negatively affected skilled regional migration applicants. Department policy changed so as not to recognise state sponsored applicants whose nominated occupation was no longer on the skilled occupation list. Application processing had been severely delayed by Department policy, and during that delay, many applicant’s occupations was no longer on the present skilled occupation list. The Department sought to have these applications refused. I campaigned that such a move to refuse these applicants’ was unreasonable and an elevation of policy over legislation. The campaign was successful. The policy was reversed. And the applications nominated occupations were accepted.

Adoption Visa: We won an appeal case where department refused a child applicant on the basis that the adoption process was not recognised under Australian or International law. We successfully presented arguments that customary adoption was lawful recognition of the adoption, and that the child and parents should be allowed to live together in Australia. The argument was accepted under appeal and the family now live happily together in Australia.