1935897 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 030 (Bridging C) visa under section 116 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The applicant, an Indonesian national, had arrived in Australia in January 2014 and subsequently applied for a Protection visa in January 2016. The applicant’s Bridging C visa was cancelled in December 2019 on the basis that he had breached a condition of his visa. The applicant sought review of this cancellation decision.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(b) of the Act was made out, and if so, whether the visa should be cancelled. This involved determining if the applicant had failed to comply with a condition of his visa, specifically condition 8101, which prohibits work in Australia. If the ground for cancellation was established, the Tribunal was then required to consider whether to exercise its discretion to cancel the visa, having regard to all relevant circumstances.

The Tribunal found that the applicant, through his own statement and submissions from his representative, conceded that he had breached condition 8101 of his Bridging C visa by engaging in work in Australia for approximately two years. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(b) was made out. As this ground did not mandate cancellation under section 116(3), the Tribunal proceeded to consider its discretion. In doing so, it had regard to the applicant's stated purpose for travel and stay, and the circumstances surrounding his accumulation of significant debt in Australia, which appeared inconsistent with his initial claims of having savings and living frugally. The Tribunal also considered matters raised by the applicant and relevant Departmental Procedural Instructions.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant’s Bridging C visa.