Aqil (Migration)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 896
•8 February 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Aqil (Migration) [2019] AATA 896
[2019] AATA 896
8 February 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal to the Tribunal regarding the cancellation of the applicant's Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) visa. The applicant, Mr Aqil, had been granted the visa to work for Sir Moses Montefiore Jewish Homes. The ground for cancellation was that the applicant had ceased employment with his sponsoring employer for a period exceeding 90 days, thereby breaching a condition of his visa.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was established, and if so, whether the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised. The applicant had ceased employment with his sponsor in December 2017 and had not secured new employment or a new nomination within the 90-day period stipulated by condition 8107(3)(b) of his visa. He had lodged a Subclass 186 visa application in March 2018, which remained pending.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal found that the ground for cancellation was made out, as the applicant had indeed ceased employment for longer than 90 days. The Tribunal then considered the exercise of discretion. It noted that the purpose of a Subclass 457 visa is to enable temporary work for an approved sponsor. The applicant had been without an approved sponsor for approximately 14 months since ceasing his previous employment. Despite having an offer of employment and a pending Subclass 186 application, the Tribunal considered that the applicant had not been able to secure an approved nomination to satisfy the conditions of his Subclass 457 visa. The Tribunal concluded that, on the totality of the circumstances, the visa should be cancelled.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 457 visa.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was established, and if so, whether the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised. The applicant had ceased employment with his sponsor in December 2017 and had not secured new employment or a new nomination within the 90-day period stipulated by condition 8107(3)(b) of his visa. He had lodged a Subclass 186 visa application in March 2018, which remained pending.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal found that the ground for cancellation was made out, as the applicant had indeed ceased employment for longer than 90 days. The Tribunal then considered the exercise of discretion. It noted that the purpose of a Subclass 457 visa is to enable temporary work for an approved sponsor. The applicant had been without an approved sponsor for approximately 14 months since ceasing his previous employment. Despite having an offer of employment and a pending Subclass 186 application, the Tribunal considered that the applicant had not been able to secure an approved nomination to satisfy the conditions of his Subclass 457 visa. The Tribunal concluded that, on the totality of the circumstances, the visa should be cancelled.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 457 visa.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Jurisdiction
-
Statutory Construction
-
Natural Justice
-
Appeal
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Aqil (Migration) [2019] AATA 896
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0