1810282 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision to cancel the protection visa of a stateless Bidoon man born in Kuwait, who had arrived in Australia in 2010. The applicant had been granted a protection visa based on his claims of being stateless, born in Kuwait, and fearing harm in Iraq due to his background and his father's former political affiliations. The Minister's delegate initiated cancellation proceedings, alleging the applicant had provided incorrect information regarding his citizenship and his fear of harm in Iraq, and had voluntarily travelled to Iraq after being granted the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had failed to comply with the requirements of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) such that his protection visa could be validly cancelled under section 109. This involved determining if the notice issued under section 107 of the Act, which outlines the grounds for cancellation, was sufficiently particularised to allow the applicant to understand and respond to the allegations of providing incorrect information and failing to notify of changes in circumstances. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant's returns to Iraq constituted non-compliance as alleged by the delegate.

The Tribunal applied principles from *Zhao v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs* and *Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Brar*, which establish that a section 107 notice must provide sufficient particulars to fairly inform the visa holder of the basis of the cancellation consideration, enabling them to adequately respond. The Tribunal found that the section 107 notice in this case, which detailed the information provided by the applicant in his protection visa application and the delegate's reasons for considering it false, was sufficiently particularised. The applicant had responded to the notice, admitting to returning to Iraq but denying providing incorrect information, and subsequently provided further explanations to the Tribunal.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the decision to cancel the applicant's visa should be set aside. While the Tribunal found the section 107 notice to be valid, the subsequent analysis of the applicant's claims regarding his nationality and the circumstances of his returns to Iraq led to this outcome, although the specific reasoning for setting aside the cancellation is not fully detailed in the provided text.