1907871 (Refugee) [2021] AATA 3669 (25 August 2021)
Corrigendum
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
CASE NUMBER: 1907871
COUNTRY OF REFERENCE: Stateless
MEMBER:Alison Murphy
DATE OF DECISION: 25 August 2021
DATE CORRIGENDUM
SIGNED:17 September 2021
PLACE OF DECISION: Melbourne
AMENDMENT: The following corrections are made to the decision:
At paragraph 3 on page 2, the words ‘resident return visa’ should be deleted, and substituted with the words ‘protection visa’.
At paragraph 7 on page 2, the words ‘resident return visa’ should be deleted, and substituted with the words ‘protection visa’.
At paragraph 9 on page 2, the words ‘resident return visa’ should be deleted, and substituted with the words ‘protection visa’.
Alison Murphy
MemberDECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
CASE NUMBER: 1907871
COUNTRY OF REFERENCE: Stateless
MEMBER:Alison Murphy
DATE:25 August 2021
PLACE OF DECISION: Melbourne
DECISION:The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and substitutes a decision that the power to cancel the visa under s 109 was not enlivened.
Statement made on 25 August 2021 at 3:56pmCATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – cancellation – protection visa – stateless/Iraq/Iran – incorrect answers in visa application – citizenship – undocumented stateless Faili Kurd or Iraqi or Iranian Kurdish citizen – grandparents’, parents’, uncles’ and aunt’s various documentation and Iranian and Iraqi laws governing them – procedural fairness – validity and sufficiency of s 107 notice – failure to provide source of information, preventing real opportunity to understand and meaningfully respond – no reference to possible Iraqi citizenship – decision maker’s satisfaction of non-compliance ‘in the way described in the notice’ – grandparents’ purported citizenship based on one questionable document provided by aunt – notice invalid and power to cancel visa does not arise – no real state of satisfaction even if notice valid – decision under review set asideLEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 101, 107, 109, 438CASES
CSH18 v MHA [2018] FCCA 3226
Kang v MIAC [2013] FCA 711MIAC v Brar (2012) 201 FCR 240
Nader v MIMA [2000] FCA 908
NAVK v MIMA [2004] FCAFC 160
SZEEM v Minister for Immigration [2005] FCMA 27
SZNKO v MIAC [2010] FCA 297
Zhao v MIMA [2000] FCA 1235Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 431 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information which does not allow the identification of an applicant, or their relative or other dependant.
statement of decision and reasons
application for review
This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 866 (Protection) visa under s.109(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
The applicant is a [Age]-year-old male who arrived in Australia by boat [in] June 2010 and sought protection. He was granted a protection visa on 13 April 2011.
The delegate cancelled the resident return visa on the basis that the applicant breached section 101 of the Act by…
Continue reading 1907871 (Refugee)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- 1907871 (Refugee) [2021] AATA 3669
- Case
- [2021] AATA 3669
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the section 107 notice was valid and sufficient, specifically whether it provided adequate particulars of the alleged non-compliance and allowed the applicant a meaningful opportunity to respond. Furthermore, the Tribunal had to consider whether the decision-maker was genuinely satisfied that the applicant had failed to comply with the requirements of section 101 of the Act, and if so, whether the power to cancel the visa under section 109 was enlivened.
The Tribunal found that the section 107 notice was invalid because it failed to provide the source of the information regarding the purported citizenship of the applicant's grandparents, thereby preventing the applicant from having a real opportunity to understand and meaningfully respond to the allegations. The notice also did not reference possible Iraqi citizenship. Even if the notice were considered valid, the Tribunal was not satisfied that there was a genuine state of satisfaction regarding the non-compliance.
Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision and substituted a new decision that the power to cancel the visa under section 109 was not enlivened.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and substitutes a decision that the power to cancel the visa under s.109 was not enlivened.Alison MurphyMemberATTACHMENT – Migration Act 1958 (extracts)5Interpretation(1)In this Act, unless the contrary intention appears:bogus document, in relation to a person, means a document that the Minister reasonably suspects is a document that:(a) purports to have been, but was not, issued in respect of the person; or(b) is counterfeit or has been altered by a person who does not have authority to do so; or(c) was obtained because of a false or misleading statement, whether or not made knowingly.97InterpretationIn this Subdivision:application form, in relation to a non‑citizen, means a form on which a non‑citizen applies for a visa, being a form that regulations made for the purposes of section 46 allow to be used for making the application.passenger card has the meaning given by subsection 506(2) and, for the purposes of section 115, includes any document provided for by regulations under paragraph 504(1)(c).Note:Bogus document is defined in subsection 5(1).98Completion of visa applicationA non‑citizen who does not fill in his or her application form or passenger card is taken to do so if he or she causes it to be filled in or if it is otherwise filled in on his or her behalf.99Information is answerAny information that a non‑citizen gives or provides, causes to be given or provided, or that is given or provided on his or her behalf, to the Minister, an officer, an authorised system, a person or the Tribunal, or the Immigration Assessment authority, reviewing a decision under this Act in relation to the non‑citizen’s application for a visa is taken for the purposes of section 100, paragraphs 101(b) and 102(b) and sections 104 and 105 to be an answer to a question in the non‑citizen’s application form, whether the information is given or provided orally or in writing and whether at an interview or otherwise.100Incorrect answersFor the purposes of this Subdivision, an answer to a question is incorrect even though the person who gave or provided the answer, or caused the answer to be given or provided, did not know that it was incorrect.101Visa applications to be correctA non‑citizen must fill in or complete his or her application form in such a way that:(a)all questions on it are answered; and(b)no incorrect answers are given or provided.107Notice of incorrect applications(1)If the Minister considers that the holder of a visa who has been immigration cleared (whether or not because of that visa) did not comply with section 101, 102, 103, 104 or 105 or with subsection (2) in a response to a notice under this section, the Minister may give the holder a notice:(a) giving particulars of the possible non‑compliance; and(b) stating that, within a period stated in the notice as mentioned in subsection (1A), the holder may give the Minister a written response to the notice that:(i)if the holder disputes that there was non‑compliance:(A)shows that there was compliance; and(B)in case the Minister decides under section 108 that, in spite of the statement under sub‑subparagraph (A), there was non‑compliance—shows cause why the visa should not be cancelled; or(ii)if the holder accepts that there was non‑compliance:(A)give reasons for the non‑compliance; and(B)shows cause why the visa should not be cancelled; and(c) stating that the Minister will consider cancelling the visa:(i)if the holder gives the Minister oral or written notice, within the period stated as mentioned in subsection (1A), that he or she will not give a written response—when that notice is given; or(ii)if the holder gives the Minister a written response within that period—when the response is given; or(iii)otherwise—at the end of that period; and(d) setting out the effect of sections 108, 109, 111 and 112; and(e) informing the holder that the holder’s obligations under section 104 or 105 are not affected by the notice under this section; and(f) requiring the holder:(i)to tell the Minister the address at which the holder is living; and(ii)if the holder changes that address before the Minister notifies the holder of the Minister’s decision on whether there was non‑compliance by the holder—to tell the Minister the changed address.(1A)The period to be stated in the notice under subsection (1) must be:(a) in respect of the holder of a temporary visa—the period prescribed by the regulations or, if no period is prescribed, a reasonable period; or(b) otherwise—14 days.(1B)Regulations prescribing a period for the purposes of paragraph (1A)(a) may prescribe different periods and state when a particular period is to apply, which, without limiting the generality of the power, may be to:(a) visas of a stated class; or(b) visa holders in stated circumstances; or(c) visa holders in a stated class of people (who may be visa holders in a particular place); or(d) visa holders in a stated class of people (who may be visa holders in a particular place) in stated circumstances.(2)If the visa holder responds to the notice, he or she must do so without making any incorrect statement.108Decision about non‑complianceThe Minister is to:(a)consider any response given by a visa holder in the way required by paragraph 107(1)(b); and(b)decide whether there was non‑compliance by the visa holder in the way described in the notice.109Cancellation of visa if information incorrect(1)The Minister, after:(a) deciding under section 108 that there was non‑compliance by the holder of a visa; and(b) considering any response to the notice about the non‑compliance given in a way required by paragraph 107(1)(b); and(c) having regard to any prescribed circumstances;may cancel the visa.(2)If the Minister may cancel a visa under subsection (1), the Minister must do so if there exist circumstances declared by the regulations to be circumstances in which a visa must be cancelled.