Boyle (Migration)

This matter concerned the review of a decision to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visa. The applicant, an Irish citizen, had been granted a Subclass 417 visa which was due to expire on 5 November 2019. He subsequently applied for a further Subclass 417 visa on 23 October 2019, indicating in his application that he had completed the required three months of specified regional work and providing payslips as supporting documentation. The Tribunal, constituted by Member Moira Brophy, considered whether the decision to cancel the visa should be affirmed.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had failed to comply with the requirements of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and, if so, whether the visa should be cancelled. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant had provided incorrect information in his visa application, contrary to section 101(b) of the Act, and if the payslips submitted were considered "bogus documents" under section 5 of the Act. The Tribunal also considered whether the notice issued under section 107 of the Act, detailing the alleged non-compliance, was valid and complied with statutory requirements.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had indeed failed to comply with section 101(b) of the Act by providing incorrect information in his visa application, as he had not completed the specified regional work. Furthermore, the payslips provided were considered bogus documents, as they were not genuinely issued for work undertaken. The Tribunal was satisfied that the delegate had reached the necessary state of mind to engage section 107 and that the notice issued under that section complied with the statutory requirements. Applying section 109 of the Act, which permits visa cancellation where a visa holder has failed to comply with specified provisions, the Tribunal concluded that the visa should be cancelled.

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