1926025 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the cancellation of a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, specifically a Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) visa, held by an applicant. The dispute arose from allegations that the applicant provided incorrect answers on incoming passenger cards and visa applications, and failed to disclose criminal convictions and pending charges, despite claiming to be a police informer. The Tribunal was tasked with determining whether the visa cancellation was valid and should be affirmed.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the Minister had the power to cancel the applicant's visa under section 109 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and if so, whether the visa should be cancelled. This involved assessing whether a valid notice under section 107 of the Act was issued to the applicant, and whether the applicant had failed to comply with the requirements of sections 101(b) and 102(b) of the Act by providing incorrect answers on visa applications and passenger cards concerning criminal convictions and pending charges. The Tribunal also had to consider the applicant's claims of being a police informer in the context of these non-compliance issues.

The Tribunal reasoned that section 109 of the Act permits visa cancellation if a visa holder fails to comply with provisions requiring the provision of correct information and notification of changes in circumstances. It found that the notice issued under section 107 of the Act complied with statutory requirements and that the applicant did not respond to this notice. The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant had indeed failed to comply with sections 101(b) and 102(b) by answering "No" to questions about criminal convictions and pending charges on multiple occasions, including his Subclass 457 visa application, when his criminal history and outstanding charges in another country indicated otherwise. The Tribunal noted that a formal guilty verdict and sentence had been imposed in relation to some of these matters, and a warrant had been issued for his arrest concerning other outstanding charges. The Tribunal concluded that the decision to cancel the applicant's visa should be affirmed.