Chani (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Tribunal regarding the cancellation of the applicant's Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The applicant had been granted the visa as a member of the family unit of the primary visa holder, based on a genuine and continuing relationship. However, the applicant subsequently informed the Tribunal that this relationship had ceased.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation under s 116(1)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was made out, and if so, whether the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised. Section 116(1)(a) permits the Minister to cancel a visa if satisfied that the visa was granted based on a fact or circumstance that no longer exists. The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant's visa was granted on the basis of his genuine and continuing relationship with the primary visa holder, and if that circumstance had indeed ceased to exist.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's visa was granted on the basis that he was in a genuine and continuing relationship with Ms Jaspreet Kaur, and that this circumstance no longer existed as the relationship had ended. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the ground for cancellation under s 116(1)(a) was established. The Tribunal then considered its discretion to cancel the visa, weighing various factors including the circumstances of the relationship breakdown, the applicant's purpose for travel, his compliance with other visa conditions, the potential hardship he might face, and his past behaviour towards the Department. Despite acknowledging some factors in the applicant's favour, the Tribunal ultimately concluded that the visa should be cancelled.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 500 (Student) visa.