Chao (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an appeal by Mr. Chao against the Minister's decision to cancel his Bridging A (Class WA) visa. The cancellation was based on the ground that Mr. Chao had provided incorrect information in a previous Working Holiday visa application, specifically concerning his compliance with the regional work requirement. The employer who purportedly provided evidence of this regional work had since been deregistered and ceased trading, raising doubts about the legitimacy of the payslips provided.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Minister had correctly exercised their discretion to cancel Mr. Chao's Bridging A visa. This required the Tribunal to determine if the initial grant of the Working Holiday visa was based on incorrect information, and if so, whether the circumstances warranted the cancellation of the subsequent Bridging A visa. The Tribunal had to assess the evidence presented regarding the regional work and the validity of the employment claims.

The Tribunal reasoned that the evidence presented by Mr. Chao regarding his regional work was not legitimate, as indicated by the deregistered status of his purported employer and the questionable nature of the payslips. Under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), the Minister has the power to cancel a visa if it was granted based on incorrect information, and must do so if prescribed circumstances exist. The Tribunal found that the circumstances here fell within the scope of the Minister's power to cancel, and that the decision to cancel the visa was open to the Minister. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.