2112251 (Migration)

2112251 (Migration) [2022] AATA 941 (23 February 2022)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
CASE NUMBER: 2112251
MEMBER:Melissa McAdam
DATE:23 February 2022
PLACE OF DECISION: Sydney
DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visa.

Statement made on 23 February 2022 at 12:10pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – cancellation – Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa – Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) – incorrect answers given in second extension application – six months of specified work in regional area while holding first extension – verification checks with claimed employer – COVID-19 restrictions – no exploration of lawful options – paid agent to complete application – current work on major project in metropolitan area – skills shortage in work sector – employer’s intention to sponsor applicant – mental health – criminal conviction and conditional release order – relationship with temporary visa holder and her plans to be sponsored by her employer – potential inconvenience or hardship – decision under review affirmed
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 101(b), 103, 107, 109(1)
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 417.211(6)
CASE
MIAC v Khadgi (2010) 190 FCR 248
Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 378 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information.
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 417 (Working Holiday) visa under s 109(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The delegate cancelled the visa on the basis that the applicant had not complied with obligations under s.101(b) of the Act. The issue in the present case is whether that ground for cancellation is made out, and if so, whether the visa should be cancelled.
Section 107 Notice (NOICC)
On 28 July 2021 the Delegate issued a Notice of Intention to Consider Cancellation of the applicant’s Working Holiday Visa (NOICC) under s.107 of the Act. In the NOICC the Delegate set out the following:
I consider that there has been non-compliance with the following section(s) of the Act:
Section 101 Visa applications to be correct
A non-citizen must fill in or complete his or her application form in such a way that:
(b) no incorrect answers are given or provided.
In relation to the above section(s), I note the application of sections 98, 99 and 100 of the Act, which state:
Section 98 Completion of visa application
A 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.
Section 99 Information is answer
Any 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.
Section 100 Incorrect answers
For 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.
Information provided in your visa application
On 18 September 2020 you lodged an application for a Working Holiday (Extension) (subclass 417) visa using the Department’s online lodgement facility, providing the following answers on the electronic visa form:
In response to the question ‘They have carried out at least six months of specified work’ you
answered ‘Yes’.
In response to the question ‘All of that work was carried out while the applicant held the second Working Holiday visa (subclass 417); OR while the applicant held a bridging visa that was in effect and was granted on the basis of the application for a second Working Holiday visa (subclass 417) which was made at a time when the applicant held the first Working Holiday visa (subclass 417)’ you answered ‘Yes’.
Under the heading ‘Details of specified work undertaken’, you provided the following answers (in part):
Employer Details
Legal registered name: Quenby Viticultural Services
Trading name: Quenby Viticultural Services
Australian Business Number (ABN): 49457432242
Employer business address
Address: Quenby Viticultural Services
Suburb / Town: Mount Barker
State / Territory Western Australia
Postcode: 6324
Work address
Business name at this location: Jindawarra Vineyard
Address: 13057 Bussel Highway
Suburb / Town: Margaret River
State / Territory: Western Australia
Postcode 6285
Work conditions
Employment type: Direct employment
Industry type: Agriculture, forestry and fishing
Industry type sub-group: Plant and animal cultivation
Description of duties Horticulture - Vineyard. Pruning vines in order to prepare for next growth season for commercial selling
Date from: 09 March 2020
Date to: 30 August 2020
Total days worked: 190 days
Under the heading ‘Working holiday declarations’, in response to the question ‘Have carried out at least six months of specified work; AND all of that work was carried out while the applicant held the second Working Holiday visa (subclass 417); OR while the applicant held a bridging visa that was in effect and was granted on the basis of the application for a second Working Holiday visa (subclass 417) which was made at a time when the applicant held the first Working Holiday visa; AND all of that work was carried out after 1 July 2019’, you answered ‘Yes’.
Based on the above information, as well as meeting other relevant criteria, you were granted your Working Holiday (Extension) visa on 18 September 2020.
Subsequent information received by the Department
The Department initiated employment verification checks with Quenby Viticultural Services, the business registered under ABN 49457432242, to verify your employment claims. On 30 September 2020, Quenby Viticultural Services contacted the Department and advised that you never worked at their business.
Possible non-compliance with section 101(b)
I consider that you provided incorrect information in your application for a Working Holiday (Extension) visa when you:
● answered ‘Yes’ to the question ‘They have carried out at least six months of specified work’;
● answered ‘Yes’ to the question ‘All of that work was carried out while the applicant held the second Working Holiday visa (subclass 417); OR while the applicant held a bridging visa that was in effect and was granted on the basis of the application for a second Working Holiday visa (subclass 417) which was made at a time when the applicant held the first Working Holiday visa (subclass 417)’;
● provided details of claimed employment with Quenby Viticultural Services, at the section of the application form titled ‘Details of Specified Work Undertaken’; and
● answered ‘Yes’ to the declaration ‘Working holiday declarations’, to the question ‘Have carried out at least six months of specified work; AND all of that work was carried out while the applicant held the second Working Holiday visa (subclass 417); OR while the applicant held a bridging visa that was in effect and was granted on the basis of the application for a second Working Holiday visa (subclass 417) which was made at a time when the applicant held the first Working Holiday visa; AND all of that work was carried out after 1 July 2019’.
I consider the above information is incorrect, as verification checks undertaken by the Department have concluded that you never worked at the business, Quenby Viticultural Services. Therefore you have not undertaken six months specified work in regional Australia.
Based on the above information, it appears you provided incorrect answers in support of your Working Holiday (Extension) visa application. I consider therefore, that you have not complied with section 101(b), and accordingly your Working Holiday (Extension) visa may be liable for cancellation under section 109 of the Act.
What you can do
Before a decision can be taken on whether to cancel your visa, the Act gives you the opportunity to comment on the possible non-compliance and to give a written response why your visa should not be cancelled. Your response should provide reasons:
● why you think you have complied, or why you have not complied, with section 101(b); and
● why you think your visa should not be cancelled (you should provide reasons why you think your visa should not be cancelled, even if you think you have complied, as the delegate may disagree with you); and
● provide any supporting evidence.
Response to NOICC
In response to a superseded NOICC the applicant emailed the department on 26 July 2021 with the following message:
I [the applicant] am writing to you that I did not comply with sections (s) 101(b) and 103 of the Migration Act 1958 (‘the Act’). I would like to apologise for the actions I have taken and I hope it doesn't affect the process of my sponsorship 482 visa. I had attempted to complete my regional work but due to covid 19 restrictions and border closures to regional areas I wasn't able to complete my regional work in time.
I am currently working on a major [project] in Sydney. I am able to provide you with a reference from my employer confirming this and that they are in the process of lodging my sponsorship 482 visa with them. I have a lot to offer in the [sector] as I am a very hard working and diligent person, and I regret the decisions I have done. I can’t reiterate enough how sorry I am for my actions.
In response to the operative NOICC the applicant provided the following materials on 12 August 2021:
-A letter in which he writes:
It is with sincere regret and remorse I write this statement in regard to a Notice of intention to consider cancellation of Working Holiday (Temporary) (class TZ) Working Holiday (subclass 417) visa under section s109 (Incorrect Info) of the Migration Act 1958.
It is my understanding that my visa may be cancelled under section 109 of the Act, due to information provided.
I made an innocent mistake in lodging and applying for the third working holiday visa, I made a critical judgement error by accepting advice from a third party that I could in fact lodge the application with the information I was provided.
Factors to take into consideration:
I currently am employed by [Employer] in NSW as a skilled [Occupation 1], I have been offered Temporary Skill Shortage visa SC 482 for 4 years and we are in the process of collating all the required paperwork for this application.
I do believe I am a person of good character and I have complied with all my other visa conditions; I have learnt a very difficult and hard lesson and understand why this adverse information has come to light. I am taking responsibility by making this statement and outlining my error in judgement at this time.
I am a valued employee and have secured employment in NSW even though the Pandemic has closed a lot of businesses. We have recently been allowed to re-commence work in NSW by abiding by strict conditions as an employees of [Employer] I have had to start the COVID vaccinations and completed my 1st dose of the vaccination and then we have to complete COVID testing every 3 days. [Employer] have stated their ongoing employment and support with this situation as provided in their endorsement letter for The Department of Home Affairs to exercise discretion with the NOICC.
-A letter from [Mr A], the Director of the applicant’s employer, in which the author writes:
I am aware [the applicant] has received a Notice of Intention to Consider Cancellation of his 3rd Subclass 417 visa. This was a great concern to me as the Director of [Employer], we have engaged in the services of our migration agent - [Mr B] to proceed with an application to sponsor [the applicant] on a Subclass 482 visa due to the skill shortage of experience [Occupation 1]s we are experiencing. We have the application all prepared and were ready to lodge when he received this notice.
I wish to provide this statement in support of not cancelling [the applicant]’s visa, by no means am I condoning his non-compliance, I wish to outline the effect it would have on my Australian company if I was unable to proceed with sponsoring [the applicant] if his visa was cancelled.
[The applicant] is a skilled [Occupation 1] of 4 we currently directly employ, and [the applicant] is able to work autonomously on site; this attribute is not something you can outline on paper. [The applicant] possesses qualities as a skilled employee that are instinctive, he is conscientious towards his work and all who converge and work with him. To source and train a new employee with these attributes is just not realistic or achievable, we have already been affected by below basic standard recruitment outcomes with previous employees regarding their attitude towards work ethics, without the tangible skill set also required, that [the applicant] executes by reinforcing the business goals.
This is pinnacle to the business operations to have skilled employees with the understanding and skill set to work as a team, therefore [the applicant] and the sponsorship application for ongoing employment is vital to [Employer] business operations.
How this would impact on the business operations, by causing a catastrophic consequence to the stringent contractual requirements. We have recently been allowed to re-commence work in NSW by abiding by strict conditions including all employees to have had their 1st dose of the vaccination and complete testing every 3 days. If I was to lose [the applicant]’s employ the undue effects of stress and operational pressure this will place onto our current employees is not achievable and [Employer] would have to turn down contracts while sourcing a replacement and would not meet the contractual requirements this would mean substantial fines as we would breach our contract/s.
Considering the lengths, we have gone to recruit and find a suitable employer it is causing myself as the Director and overseer of onsite operations sleepless nights and high levels of anxiety.
The outcome of this would affect not just directly employed staff but also contractors we appoint, also those third-party operations whom supply our machinery, workwear just to name a few would feel the effects of such a staffing operational problem.
These contracts require that we meet strict time and budget constraints. [The applicant]’s position within the company as a temporary sponsored employee directly contributes to the staffing level required enabling the successful consistent daily operations of the company within his area of skill, this bring with it not only consistency but also increasing the business worksite confidence for our contractors to continue to appoint our company services we continue to expand, we are therefore anxious to secure his long-term employment.
The company employs over 100 staff and the company in the last full financial year turnover approx. $20 mil.
Current and upcoming works:
- Name: [Project 1]: [Stage 1]
Address: [Suburb]
Duration: [Time 1]
Approx. Value: $[Amount 1]
- Name: [Project 1]: [Stage 2]
Address: [Suburb]
Duration: [Time 1]
Approx. Value: $[Amount 2]
- Name: [Project 1]: [Stage 3]
Address: [Suburb]
Duration: [Time 1]
Approx. Value: $[Amount 3]
- Name: [Project 1]: [Stage 4]
Address: [Suburb]
Duration: [Time 2]
Approx. Value: $[Amount 4]
- Name: [Project 2]
Address: [Suburb 2]
Duration: [Time 3]
Approx. Value: $[Amount 5]
- Name: [Project 3]
Address: Western Sydney NSW
Duration: Ongoing Annually
Approx. Value: $[Amount 6] a year
Approx. total = $[Total] per year
The Temporary Skilled Program is a vital tool in addressing the skills shortage Australia is currently experiencing, which I see worsening due to the aging population and looming retirement of many baby boomers, thereby depleting the skills pool within the [industry].
Many younger Australian workers coming through now have a poor work ethic, bad attitude, limited skills and are unreliable due to constant job hopping with the volume of current [work] in NSW. Australia is in a crisis due to this, and the overseas Temporary Skilled program is a necessity to assist us meet our contractual requirements.
The Temporary Skilled program is becoming increasingly expensive, time consuming and particularly stressful for many applicants due to delays in processing applications.
We attest that [the applicant]’s position of [Occupation 1] is genuine, ongoing and remains available. If his visa is cancelled and he is forced to cease employment this will cause a large array of operational issues as outline above.
I ask you take into account the effect cancelling [the applicant]’s visa would have on my Australian company.
-The applicant’s employment contract.
Information to the Tribunal
Pre-Hearing Submission
On 4 February 2022 the applicant’s Agent provided the following written materials to the Tribunal:
-A copy of the applicant’s Irish passport.
-A reference letter from the applicant’s partner, [Ms C]. She works as [an Occupation 2] in Sydney and hopes to obtain sponsorship for a visa in Australia. She writes that if the applicant has to return to Ireland then she will do so too and this will adversely impact her personal and professional growth. She would then have concerns for her and the applicant’s mental health because of the socio-economic situation in Ireland.
-A reference letter from the applicant’s housemate, [Mr D], who describes the applicant as “kind, earnest, trustworthy, well-respected, ethical, skilled, and a very hardworking man”.
-A copy of the applicant’s NSW heavy vehicle licence.
-Copies of Training Certificates awarded to the applicant in February 2019, August 2020, and May 2021
-A copy of a UK Police Certificate in the applicant’s name recording no offences.
-A copy of an Irish Police Certificate in the applicant’s name recording no offences.
-A copy of an Australian AFP Police Certificate in the applicant’s name recording the offence of “Possess Prohibited Drug” and Court Result “conditional release order [without] conviction” 18 months commencing [2]/2021 concluding [08]/2022”.
-A screenshot of a company ‘[Company], webpage.
-A letter from the Director, [Mr A], of applicant’s employer [Employer], detailing the applicant’s work; their intention to sponsor the applicant for a subclass 482 visa; the applicant’s valued skills as [an Occupation 1] who can work autonomously; and the adverse impacts upon the company if the applicant can no longer work for them, including turning down future contracts while a replacement is found. The company employs over 100 staff and had a last financial year turnover of $20 million.
-A copy of the applicant’s employment agreement dated 23 June 2021.
-A screenshot of [Employer] Breast Cancer Research support flyer.
-2019 payslips in the applicant’s name.
-A copy of the [Local Court]’s Conditional Release Order, dated [February] 2021, regarding the offence ‘Possess Prohibited Drug’, and stating that the applicant is found guilty without proceeding to conviction.
-A copy of three AAT decisions.
-A written submission by the applicant’s Agent.
-A written statement by the applicant, dated 3 February 2022.
In the applicant’s written statement he sets out the following:
My name is [the applicant].
I was born on [Date]. I am currently [Age] years of age.
I am an Irish national by birth, please find my passport attached. Please also find attached a copy of my Irish Police Certificate, UK Police Certificate and AFP Clearance.
I provide this statement in support of my upcoming review hearing in respect to my Working Holiday Visa (Subclass 417) cancellation. In preparing this statement I had a conference with my solicitor ([Mr. E]).
I have treated the visa cancellation decision very seriously. I understand that in the present case that the Tribunal must decide whether the grounds for the cancellation are made out and whether the Tribunal Member should exercise his or her discretion to set aside the decision and not cancel my visa.
I travelled to Australia [in] January 2019 on a working holiday visa to experience the beautiful culture and iconic scenery of the country and obtain work experience. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic spread and I was affected greatly by the impacts of this. I have suffered many hardships as a result of this pandemic emotionally, psychologically and financially. I am trying day by day to cope and take the steps I need to recover and get back on track with my life.
The COVID-19 pandemic has been tough for me as I have watched my friends and family back in the Ireland struggle with it.
With time running out on my visa I was very worried that I would have to return home to Ireland and my family would be unable to support me. I exerted my efforts in attempting to search for regional work which proved extremely difficult to find due to the pandemic. I had previously completed the required work for my second working holiday visa at [Workplace] in Queensland. Please see attached payslips. Unfortunately, for my third working holiday visa, although I made attempts to search for regional work, I was unable to find any availability, including at companies such as [Company]. Please see attached screenshot of the [Company] Webpage. I was unable to secure any regional work to complete the requirements of my visa. I came to the realisation that I did not have enough time on my visa to complete the required period of work.
Throughout 2020 my mental health continued to decline and I suffered from ongoing depression, and anxiety although I never received a formal diagnosis. My mental health was worsened by the pandemic, difficulty in obtaining regional work, concerns for my visa, fears for my family and friends back home and feeling isolated from everyone around me. Regrettably this led to a series of poor decision making for me and I made a number of choices that I am deeply remorseful for.
My mental health continued to decline and unfortunately, I turned to recreational drug use as a coping mechanism to help me with dealing with the stressors I was facing. [In] December 2020 I was charged with possession of an illicit substance. [In] February 2021 I was sentenced under s 9(1)(b) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, and received an 18 month good behaviour bond without proceeding to a conviction, which is due to expire [in] August 2022. Please see attached a copy of the Court Outcome.
This was a significant turning point for me and I used this opportunity to reflect on the decisions I had made. I was deeply ashamed and regretted the decisions I had made. I decided that I could not continue on like this and had to take active steps and seek support to get my life on track.
During this time, I was aware that COVID-19 cases in Ireland were widespread with deaths increasing. I became extremely fearful that if I was to return to Ireland I was at increased risk of contracting COVID-19 than if I was to remain in Australia. I was also concerned that my mental health would continue to deteriorate further if I was to return to Ireland in circumstances of high risk and uncertainty.
My family in Ireland suffered greatly as a result of the pandemic. My Mother and Father are both retired and faced ongoing financial hardship. I have one brother who lives in [City in Ireland] and works in [Work sector]. The industry was also significantly impacted by the pandemic with work greatly reduced. My family members have been struggling through financial hardship and this increased my anxieties and worries, making me fearful of returning to Ireland and burdening my family further. I have another brother who is currently on a 2nd year working holiday visa and is doing regional work in [City in Australia].
Unfortunately, the above circumstances caused my mental state to worsen at the time of making the application which led my judgment to be significantly impaired. The thought of returning to Ireland and burdening my family weighed on me heavily and caused my mental health to deteriorate further. I began to experience frequent anxiety and felt constantly depressed and hopeless. My time to find regional work was running out, and due to this and added pressures in my life, I suffered from severe mental health issues and poor decision making.
I felt extremely trapped, and isolated. I felt desperate and as if I had no other option but to provide false information on my application to extend my stay or otherwise risk my physical and mental wellbeing by returning to Ireland. I realise now this was an extremely poor decision to make.
I was suffering from stress and anxiety from visa concerns, my family's situation and the ongoing effects of the pandemic. I felt extremely lonely and as though I was just a burden on everyone. Unfortunately, the situation got the better of me as I struggled to cope psychologically which also led to me being charged with above offence.
In or around September 2020, I was informed of an 'agent' from a friend of a friend. Out of sheer desperation I contacted this person via email about extending my stay in Australia. It was my mistake to not clarify which visa I was eligible for and how this would be obtained. I was told that this "agent" would take care of the issue for me and I did not ask many questions. I now realise this was an extremely poor decision. I completed a questionnaire that I was provided. Naively, I transferred fees in the amount of $2,000, being all the savings I had at the time. I also provided my debit card details. I was then advised that the "agent" had lodged a visa application on my behalf and this was granted on 18 September 2020. I understand that I am responsible for the contents of what was lodged.
There was very limited communication with the "agent" and I have limited knowledge of who this person was. I know now I was foolish and naive to do this, but my mental health, reasoning and judgement was not sound at this point in my life. This was perhaps the lowest point of my entire life. I was not thinking rationally at the time and acted completely out of character. I did not think of the potential repercussions of my actions and was desperate to find a way out of my predicament. I am of the view the agent preyed on my desperation and has been operating a scam that has similarly affected many others.
I accept it was my mistake that I did not take responsibility to check the contents of the application and supporting documents provided to the Department of Home Affairs. I have now been explained the provisions of section 98 of the Act, which state that I am to take responsibility for information contained in visa applications even if lodged by an agent.
I have also been explained the exclusion period if my visa remains cancelled.
I assert that I did not actively partake in the process. I truly do apologise for my actions that have led me here and I am deeply ashamed and embarrassed to find myself in this situation.
I have been in Australia for 3 years and consider myself an integrated part of the community. I currently work full-time with [Employer] in NSW as a skilled [Occupation 1]. This occupation is in high demand in Australia. I enjoy my work as it feels purposeful and believe I am a great asset to the team and the [industry] in Sydney. Please see attached letter from my employer and employment contract. My employer has offered me a Temporary Skill Shortage visa SC 482 for 4 years. I feel that I have so much more to offer Australia and hope the country can allow me the opportunity to grow and benefit the community. My intentions were to remain in Australia and further my work experience. However due to the events from last year, I am unsure of my current position. I intend to complete a skills assessment in the near future.
I have worked in my current role since June 2021, working on large scale [projects] all across Sydney. This includes working on projects such as the [Project 1]. I consider this a contribution to the Australian community. My job gives me a sense of purpose and allows me to feel that I am contributing to the community. I have obtained several qualifications relating to my current role including:
Certificate III in [Subject 1]:
[Unit 1];
[Unit 2];
[Unit 3];
Obtaining a Heavy Vehicle Drivers Licence; and
Obtaining a Certificate in [Subject 2];
Obtaining industry relevant first Aid Training.
I am currently in a stable role and am concerned that I will be unable to find employment if I am required to return to Ireland. I also understand that if I am required to return to Ireland, this will cause my employer undeniable hardship and there will be a flow on effect to not just my employer by the contracts and companies we have been engaged by.
If my visa remains cancelled and I am requested to leave Australia, this will cause undeniable hardship to not only myself but my family in Ireland. I am employed in Australia and have been actively setting my life up here for the past 3 years.
In Ireland I will be forced to be a burden on my family however due to the financial hardship being faced and the fact that both my parents are retired I am unsure whether my family will even be in a position to support me. Unemployment rates remain high in Ireland due to COVID-19 and I constantly lose sleep thinking about where I will go and how I will support myself if I have to return to Ireland as my family cannot support me.
I will not be eligible for any COVID-19 Pandemic Unemployment Payment, as I was not a resident in Ireland over the past year.
I am passionate about giving back to our community. I have been involved in raising breast cancer awareness through my current employment. I assisted in spray painting the new [truck] pink and placing a QR code on the side to allow people to donate to the National Breast Cancer Foundation. On occasions I drive the truck with the breast cancer campaign logo and information to raise awareness and promote the importance of this day. I also regularly make donations to the Salvation Army.
I have also strengthened and developed personal connections in Australia. As I have mentioned, my brother is currently completing regional work in [City in Australia]. I am also currently in a relationship with [Ms C] since September 2021. She is currently on a working holiday visa however intends to remain in Australia in the long term. [Ms C] and I have discussed building a life together in Australia however if I am forced to leave Australia this will cause our relationship to breakdown. I will also be prevented from spending time with my brother and the friends I have gained.
I have also established strong and meaningful friendships that I value greatly. During the COVID-19 lockdowns my friend was suffering from financial hardship and I loaned him money to assist.
I truly believe that I would be a significant benefit to Australia if my visa cancellation was set aside. I will continue to contribute to Australia's [sector]. Working in my current role gives me a great sense of purpose as I feel like I am helping the Australian public. I had intended to stay in Australia for the foreseeable future with an end goal of obtaining Permanent Residency.
I have not committed any further crimes or breached any other visa conditions since the cancellation except for the one possession charge which occurred during a period of poor judgment and mental health decline. I am a good person and truly regret the decisions I made.
I understand that due to the current application and the incorrect information provided I was granted a visa which I may not have been eligible for.
I humbly ask that the Tribunal take a compassionate approach when deciding on my review application and allow me a second chance in Australia to pursue my dreams.
Tribunal Hearing

The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 7 February 2022 to give evidence and present arguments.
The following is a summary of the information provided by the applicant at the hearing:
a.He confirmed that he did not complete six months specified work in regional Australia and had provided incorrect information in his visa application.
b.When he applied for the visa he was aware he did not meet the central criteria for its grant. At the time he did not think properly because of his mental health. He wanted to get the visa and get started.
c.His brother was able to find regional work because he was in Victoria. The applicant could not find work at this time because the borders were closed. The Tribunal put to the applicant that there were regional areas in New South Wales he could try to find work in. The applicant agreed. He stated that he sent emails to the [Workplace] and contacted the place where his brother worked and a dairy farm but they had no work for the applicant.
d.He was worried that if he had to go back to Ireland he could catch COVID. The Tribunal put to the applicant that it was also possible to catch COVID in Australia. The applicant did not respond.
e.The Tribunal asked the applicant if he had contacted the Department to discuss his visa options before applying for the third Working Holiday visa. He responded he did not as he did not know he could. He also did not seek assistance or advice from a Migration Agent as he was not thinking right.
f.The applicant did not return to Ireland because he thought his parents would not be able to support him and his mental health would get worse. There are also more work opportunities in Australia than in Ireland. The Tribunal put to the applicant that unemployment rates in Ireland were reportedly not much higher than the rate in Australia. The applicant responded that unemployment is high in Ireland. The Tribunal invited the applicant and his agent to submit further evidence of this after the hearing.
g.At the time his mates told the applicant that Lee Hansol could get a visa sorted and he would just need the email address. The applicant made an innocent mistake applying for the visa through Lee Hansol. The mistake was innocent because the applicant was not thinking right. The applicant contacted Lee Hansol who said they could get the applicant a visa and set him a questionnaire to fill out.
h.The applicant completed three months of specified work to obtain his second Working Holiday visa. He did this at the [Workplace], [Location], in Queensland. He helped with [Job task 2].
i.The applicant was charged with drug possession while he was holding the third Working Holiday visa. He was suffering from depression at the time which led him to commit the offence. He is coping now.
j.His partner holds her first Working Holiday visa. She arrived in August 2021 and they met in September. She intends to get sponsored and do regional work.
k.He works as [an Occupation 1], [doing Job task 1].
l.The applicant’s undiagnosed mental health issues were hardship, stress, anxiety and depression. He had these because of COVID. All his family had COVID. He means his parents had COVID. This was in September 2020. He applied for the third Working Holiday visa because his parents could not support him in Ireland. There is no work for him in Ireland. His parents had COVID for two weeks and stayed at home for this time, that was all.
m.The applicant’s mental health issues began in around August or September 2020. COVID happened and his work was affected. He was off work for a few weeks. He had anxiety and wanted to stay in his house and not talk to anyone. It lasted about three months. He just sat around the house and did not leave his room. He did not want to talk to anyone. He did not seek treatment or help. He dealt with it on his own. The applicant was worried about his mental health at the time but did not seek treatment. He thought he would get better himself by going out with friends and the crew he was working with. He has friends in Ireland he can go out with there.
n.He got better because he obtained a full-time job and met his partner six months ago.
o.He got a full-time job in July 2021. He started work in [Work sector] as [an Occupation 1] in around November 2020. He had been unemployed for two weeks because [work] stopped for this period. He started working two or three days a week but was depressed because it was not full-time work
p.The Tribunal asked the applicant if he had ever worked in Ireland and he replied yes. The Tribunal asked him what sort of work he did there and he replied he worked as [an Occupation 1] in Ireland too.
q.If his visa had not been cancelled he planned to get a sponsor for a temporary visa here. If his visa remains cancelled he will have to leave and go back to Ireland. His mental health will worsen and he will have to break up with his partner. She plans to get sponsored in Australia.
r.The applicant has not breached any other visa conditions.
s.The applicant has not formed any relationships with children in Australia.
t.If he has to leave Australia he will not be able to spend time with his brother in Australia. His brother intends to get sponsored and get a three year visa in Australia, and then return to Ireland.
u.The applicant will not be able to manage his mental health in Ireland because he will be at home and there will be no work. There is [Occupation 1] work available in Ireland but the work was getting quiet when the applicant left Ireland. The Tribunal put to the applicant that as an experienced [Occupation 1] there should be opportunity for him to find this work again in Ireland and the applicant agreed.
v.The applicant’s Agent submitted that the applicant is not very articulate. For a considerable amount of time the applicant suffered depression because of various factors in his life. His partner is hoping to get sponsored in Australia as [an Occupation 2]. She gives the applicant support. The applicant finds enjoyment at his work. His employer has supported him a lot. The unemployment rate is higher in Ireland because the population is greater there. The applicant’s parents will suffer hardship to support the applicant in Ireland. They are on a pension. Even to feed the applicant will be quite expensive for them. The applicant’s other brother lives in Ireland but the applicant will be a burden. It will cause the applicant hardship to have a three year ban on returning to Australia. It will put the applicant’s life on hold. He is [Age] years old and will not be able to come back here until his [Decade]. He has contributed to breast cancer awareness by often driving the pink work truck when others won’t because they think it’s embarrassing. He did not actively participate in making the visa application and never saw it. He only found out about what was in the application when he received the NOICC. He apologises. He made several mistakes including the possession charge and was drinking a bit. No conviction was recorded. If his visa remains cancelled it puts him in a downward spiral. He is a genuine person. He has learned his lesson for rest of life and he is on the right track. The agent will provide some evidence in support of his submissions.
w.The applicant stated he apologises and has learned his lesson. The Tribunal asked him what lesson he learned and he responded to check an application for a visa before it is lodged.
Post-Hearing Submission
On 22 February 2022 the applicant submitted the following written materials:
-A character reference letter from his parents. In the letter they also write that they are pensioners and could not financially support the applicant in Ireland and that there is a lack of jobs in Ireland.
-A copy of the applicant’s father’s weekly State Pension Contributory entitlement letter.
-A copy of the applicant’s mother’s weekly Invalidity Pension entitlement letter.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
Section 109(1) of the Act allows the Minister to cancel a visa if the visa holder has failed to comply with ss.101, 102, 103, 104, 105 or 107(2) of the Act. Broadly speaking, these sections require non-citizens to provide correct information in their visa applications and passenger cards, not to provide bogus documents and to notify the Department of any incorrect information of which they become aware and of any relevant changes in circumstances.
The exercise of the cancellation power under s.109 of the Act is conditional on the Minister issuing a valid notice to the visa holder under s.107 of the Act, providing particulars of the alleged non-compliance. Where a notice is issued that does not comply with the requirements in s.107, the power to cancel the visa does not arise. Extracts of the Act relevant to this case are attached to this decision.
In the present matter, the Tribunal is satisfied that the delegate had reached the necessary state of mind to engage s.107 and that the notice issued under s.107 complied with the statutory requirements.
Was there non-compliance as described in the s.107 notice?
The issue before the Tribunal is whether there was non-compliance in the way described in the s.107 notice, being the manner particularised in the notice, and if so, whether the visa should be cancelled. The non-compliance identified and particularised in the s.107 notice was non-compliance with s.101(b) of the Act in the following respects:
That the applicant provided incorrect information in his application for a Working Holiday (Extension) visa when he:
● answered ‘Yes’ to the question ‘Has the applicant undertaken 6 months of specified
work as the holder of a first Working Holiday visa (subclass 417)?’;
● provided details of claimed employment with Quenby Viticultural Services at the section of the application form titled ‘Details of Specified Work Undertaken’; and
● answered ‘Yes’ to the declaration ‘Are applying for their third Working Holiday visa (subclass 417) and have completed 6 months of specified work as the holder of a second working holiday visa’.
The above information was considered incorrect, as verification checks undertaken by the Department concluded that the applicant never worked at the business, Quenby Viticultural Services. Therefore he had not undertaken six months specified work in regional Australia.
The applicant has confirmed that he did not work for Quenby Viticultural Services or complete six months of specified work in regional Australia. On the evidence before it the Tribunal finds that there was non-compliance with s.101(b) by the applicant in the way described in the s.107 notice.
Should the visa be cancelled?
As the Tribunal has decided that there was non-compliance in the way described in the notice given to the applicant under s.107 of the Act, it is necessary to consider whether the visa should be cancelled pursuant to s.109(1). Cancellation in this context is discretionary, as there are no mandatory cancellation circumstances prescribed under s.109(2).
In exercising this power, the Tribunal must consider the applicant’s response (if any) to the s.107 notice about the non-compliance, and have regard to any prescribed circumstances: s.109(1)(b) and (c). The prescribed circumstances are set out in r.2.41 of the Regulations. Briefly, they are:
·     the correct information
·     the content of the genuine document (if any)
·     whether the decision to grant a visa or immigration clear the visa holder was based, wholly or partly, on incorrect information or a bogus document
·     the circumstances in which the non-compliance occurred
·     the present circumstances of the visa holder
· the subsequent behaviour of the visa holder concerning his or her obligations under Subdivision C of Division 3 of Part 2 of the Act
·     any other instances of non-compliance by the visa holder known to the Minister
·     the time that has elapsed since the non-compliance
·     any breaches of the law since the non-compliance and the seriousness of those breaches
·     any contribution made by the holder to the community.
While these factors must be considered, they do not represent an exhaustive statement of the circumstances that might properly be considered to be relevant in any given case: MIAC v Khadgi (2010) 190 FCR 248. The Tribunal may also have regard to lawful government policy. The relevant policy is set out in the Department’s Procedural Advice Manual) PAM3 ‘General visa cancellation powers’, which refers to matters such as the consequences of cancelling the visa, international obligations and any other relevant matters.
The correct information
The correct information is that the applicant had not completed six months of specified work in regional Australia at the time of his third subclass 417 visa application.
The correct information was of critical relevance to the assessment of the visa application and should have been provided.
The Tribunal considers this a significant matter which weighs in favour of cancellation of the visa.
The content of the genuine document (if any)
This is not a relevant consideration in this matter.
Whether the decision to grant a visa or immigration clear the visa holder was based, wholly or partly, on incorrect information
Clause 417.211(6) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations requires the applicant to have carried out (whether on a full-time, part-time or casual basis) a period or periods, equivalent to at least six months full-time work, of specified work in regional Australia as the holder of a second subclass 417 visa.
This was a substantive criterion and a central requirement for the grant of the visa. If the requirement was not fulfilled the visa could not be granted.
The Tribunal therefore considers that the grant of the third subclass 417 visa to the applicant was based, in large part, on the incorrect information given in the visa application.
The Tribunal considers this a significant matter which weighs in favour of cancellation of the visa.
The circumstances in which the non-compliance occurred
The applicant gave evidence that the incorrect information was provided because he was in poor mental health, not thinking properly and did not want to return to Ireland.
The applicant has not provided any medical evidence regarding his claimed mental health problems. He did not seek treatment for his health. He stated the cause for his poor mental health was concern for his parents in Ireland having COVID-19 and loss of work in Australia because of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. He claims he was depressed and anxious and did not leave his room in his home.
At the same time he received advice from friends regarding a contact who could obtain the third subclass 417 visa for him despite him not fulfilling the specified work criterion. He contacted this person and provided requested information.
The applicant also submitted evidence of completing a training certificate course in August 2020. He was also able to apply for and obtain work in or around September 2020 and then attend work and perform his job.
The Tribunal accepts that the applicant would be worried about his parents, COVID-19, his visa situation and his work situation in or around September 2020. The Tribunal accepts that this would make the applicant depressed and anxious. However there is little evidence to suggest that the applicant’s mental health at the time was so poor that he was not responsible for seeking fraudulent assistance to obtain a visa he was aware he was not entitled to, or that he was justified in doing so. There is no evidence that he lacked capacity to understand his actions or that he lacked self-control over them.
The applicant’s evidence about his attempts to obtain specified work indicate he made only minimal effort. The Tribunal accepts that the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions lessened his opportunity to obtain specified work but there is no evidence that the circumstances prevented the applicant from obtaining specified work or that he would have been unsuccessful if he had made greater effort to do so.
The Tribunal notes that the applicant’s second subclass 417 visa was not due to expire until January 2021 and that he had substantial time to explore lawful options to remain in Australia or to make plans to depart Australia. Instead the applicant chose to pay an unknown person to obtain the visa for him, fully aware he did not meet the visa criteria.
The Tribunal considers the circumstances in which the non-compliance occurred weigh in favour of cancelling the visa.
The present circumstances of the visa holder
The applicant gave evidence that he is in a partner relationship with another Irish citizen in Australia, that he has full time employment as [an Occupation 1] with a [company], that his brother is in Australia and that he has made friends in Australia.
The Tribunal accepts that the applicant has established strong connections within Australia and gives this factor weight against the cancellation of his visa.
The subsequent behaviour of the visa holder concerning his or her obligations under Subdivision C of Division 3 of Part 2 of the Act
There is no adverse information before the Tribunal regarding the applicant's subsequent behaviour concerning his obligations. This factor weighs against the cancellation of his visa.
Any other instances of non-compliance by the visa holder known to the Minister
There is no evidence before the Tribunal of any other instances of non-compliance by the applicant. The Tribunal gives this factor weight against the cancellation of his visa.
The time that has elapsed since the non-compliance
It has been about 18 months since the applicant’s non-compliance. The Tribunal does not consider this to be a significant amount of time and accordingly considers this factor neutrally.
Any breaches of the law since the non-compliance and the seriousness of those breaches
The applicant provided information that he was found guilty of a drug possession charge in Sydney in early 2021 but no conviction was recorded. The applicant explained that the charge arose because of his poor mental health at the time and that it is his only breach of the law in Australia.
The Court’s decision not to proceed to conviction is some indication that the applicant’s breach was not viewed as particularly serious by the judiciary. Given it is also the only recorded instance of a breach of the law by the applicant, the Tribunal does not consider that it weighs in favour of cancelling the applicant’s visa.
Any contribution made by the holder to the community
The Tribunal accepts that the applicant’s work is highly valued by his NSW employer and that the applicant has been paying tax in Australia. The Tribunal also accepts that the applicant has participated in breast cancer research campaigns through his willingness to drive a truck painted pink which promotes breast cancer research. The Tribunal also accepts that the applicant makes charitable donations to the Salvation Army and has also helped his friends financially.
The Tribunal therefore finds that the applicant has made some significant contributions to the community while in Australia. The Tribunal gives this factor weight against the cancellation of his visa.
Whether there would be consequential cancellations under s.140
There is no evidence of any persons in Australia whose visas would be cancelled as a consequence of the cancellation of the applicant’s visa.
Whether there are mandatory legal consequences, such as whether cancellation would result in the visa holder being unlawful and liable to detention, or whether indefinite detention is a possible consequence of cancellation, or whether there are provisions in the Act which prevent the person from making a valid visa application without the Minister's intervention

The Tribunal notes that the cancellation of the applicant’s visa could lead to the applicant becoming an unlawful non-citizen who could be detained and removed from Australia pursuant to s.189 if he chooses to remain in Australia without a valid visa. He may also face difficulties in being granted further visas in Australia and could be subject to a three-year exclusion period unless he meets the relevant Public Interest Criterion (PIC 4013).
While the mandatory legal consequences may cause inconvenience or even hardship to the applicant if his visa is cancelled, he has benefited from holding a visa with respect to which he did not meet the central requirements.
The Tribunal acknowledges the difficulty the legal consequences of the visa cancellation will and may cause the applicant but they are intended consequences. The Tribunal does not view them as unduly harsh or otherwise concerning in the circumstances. The Tribunal does not view the mandatory consequences as a factor that weighs against the cancellation of the applicant’s visa.
Whether any international obligations, including non-refoulement and best interests of the children as a primary consideration, would be breached as a result of the cancellation
There is nothing to suggest that Australia's international obligations would be breached as a result of the cancellation. The Tribunal therefore views this factor neutrally.
Any other relevant matters, including the degree of hardship that may be caused to the visa holder and any family member
The applicant has presented evidence of wanting to stay in Australia to continue to work and to arrange sponsorship for a further temporary visa before returning to Ireland. The Tribunal accepts that it will be disruptive to the applicant’s career and deprive him temporarily of an income to have to depart Australia.
The applicant has a partner in Australia who is trying to extend her stay here and does not want to leave Australia in the near future. The applicant’s departure would therefore cause them both emotional hardship and uncertainty. The Tribunal also accepts that the applicant will be sad to be in a different country from his friends and from his brother who is in Victoria, Australia.
The applicant also gave evidence that his return to Ireland would cause him mental and financial hardship because he would not be able to find employment in Ireland. The Tribunal does not accept this. The applicant gave evidence of being employed in his profession as [an Occupation 1] in Ireland and to have developed these skills to a high level of expertise in Australia. Despite his and his agent’s assertions that unemployment is at a particularly high rate in Ireland they have not provided any independent evidence that this is the case. In contradiction the available independent evidence[1] shows the unemployment rate in Ireland to be not much higher than that in Australia. Given the applicant’s valued and readily transferable and employable skills the Tribunal does not accept that he will face any substantial difficulty finding suitable employment in Ireland.
[1] See for example Moody’s Analytics, Ireland Unemployment Rate | Moody's Analytics (economy.com); Ireland’s Central Statistic Office, Monthly Unemployment - CSO - Central Statistics Office
The applicant stated that his return to Ireland would be a burden upon his parents and cause them hardship. In their letter his parents show themselves to be very supportive of the applicant and to hold him in high regard. Their statement that they cannot financially support the applicant is not explained, apart from their characterisation as pensioners. The Tribunal does not consider that a temporary reliance upon his parents for accommodation and food would present anything more than mild inconvenience for his parents which would be countered by the emotional and eventual financial support the applicant would be able to offer them. However the Tribunal accepts there would be a level of temporary disruption to his parents’ lives if the applicant has to return to their home.
The Tribunal also accepts it will be emotionally hard upon the applicant and disruptive to his life for his visa to remain cancelled and to possibly be required to depart Australia.
The applicant’s employer stated that the applicant’s work skills are needed and highly valued in Australia and by their company. The Tribunal accepts that the applicant’s skills are of high value to his employer and the industry in Australia. The Tribunal also accepts that it will cause hardship to the applicant’s employer to lose the valued services of the applicant.
Overall, the Tribunal gives this factor weight against the cancellation of the visa.
Conclusion on the exercise of the discretion
The Tribunal has considered the totality of the applicant's circumstances.
The Tribunal accepts that restrictions imposed due to the COVID-19 pandemic increased the difficulty for him to find regional specified work. The Tribunal also accepts that the uncertainty of the time and worries caused by the pandemic caused the applicant some depression and anxiety. However, depression, anxiety and problems meeting a central criteria for the grant of a visa do not justify falsifying information to unlawfully overcome a legal and purposeful requirement.
As found above there are factors in the applicant’s favour which weigh against the cancellation of his visa, particularly the hardship the cancellation will cause the applicant, his partner and his employer; and the otherwise relatively good record the applicant has in Australia. However the Tribunal places greater weight on the fact that the decision to grant the visa was based upon incorrect answers to substantive and critical questions, and that the applicant was not entitled to the visa, having not met a central requirement for it. His actions were deliberate with an awareness he was not entitled to the visa. In the Tribunal's view, the fact that the decision was based on the incorrect answers, and the circumstances of the non-compliance, outweigh the other considerations.
The Tribunal has decided that there was non-compliance by the applicant in the way described in the notice given under s.107 of the Act. Further, having regard to all the relevant circumstances, as discussed above, the Tribunal concludes that the visa should be cancelled.
DECISION
The Tribunal affirms the decision to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visa.
Melissa McAdam
Member

ATTACHMENT – 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.
97Interpretation
In 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 application
A 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 answer
Any 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 answers
For 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 correct
A 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‑compliance
The 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.

[2022] AATA 941

23 February 2022

Key Legal Topics

Areas of Law

Immigration

Administrative Law

Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

Judicial Review

Procedural Fairness

Jurisdiction

Natural Justice

Statutory Construction

Remedies