Bales (Migration)

This matter concerned the review of a decision to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visa. The dispute arose from information provided by the applicant in a second extension application, specifically regarding six months of specified work in a regional area. The Department of Home Affairs conducted verification checks which indicated the applicant had not worked for the named employer, Mat Mining Pty Limited, leading to a finding of incorrect information provided in the application. The applicant did not respond to the invitation to provide current information, had departed Australia, and the Tribunal was asked to affirm the cancellation decision.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had failed to comply with section 101 of the Migration Act 1958 by providing incorrect information in their visa application, and if so, whether the visa should be cancelled under the discretionary power provided by section 109(1) of the Act. The Tribunal was required to determine if the notice issued under section 107 of the Act complied with statutory requirements and if the applicant’s actions constituted non-compliance as particularised in that notice.

The Tribunal found that the notice issued under section 107 complied with the Act and that the applicant had indeed failed to comply with section 101 by providing incorrect information. This conclusion was based on the Department’s verification checks which revealed that the applicant had not worked for Mat Mining Pty Limited as claimed, meaning the applicant had not completed the required six months of specified work. As non-compliance was established, the Tribunal then considered the discretionary power to cancel the visa under section 109(1). Having regard to all relevant circumstances, the Tribunal concluded that the visa should be cancelled.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visa.