2206507 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision concerning the cancellation of a Skilled (Migrant) (Class VE) visa, Subclass 175, held by the applicant. The dispute arose from the applicant's provision of incorrect information in his visa application, specifically regarding his identity and previous visa history, which led to a notice of potential non-compliance. The applicant did not dispute the validity of the notice but argued that strong grounds existed for the visa not to be cancelled.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had complied with section 101 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by providing correct information in his visa application. It also had to consider whether the decision to grant the visa was based wholly or partly on incorrect information or a bogus document. Finally, if non-compliance was established, the Tribunal had to exercise its discretion as to whether the visa should be cancelled, considering all relevant circumstances.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had indeed provided incorrect information, including using an alias and failing to disclose previous visa refusals and outstanding debts to the Commonwealth. This non-compliance was deliberate, aimed at circumventing the requirement to repay a prior debt and thus obtain the visa. However, the Tribunal placed significant weight on the applicant's extensive history in Australia, spanning over 20 years, his established work and social ties, and crucially, his Australian citizen spouse and two Australian citizen children who attend local schools. The Tribunal concluded that, despite the non-compliance, the strong ties to Australia and the best interests of the children weighed heavily in favour of not cancelling the visa.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision not to cancel the applicant's Subclass 175 (Skilled - Independent) visa.