Chen (Migration)

This matter concerned the review of a decision to cancel the first applicant's Subclass 482 – Temporary Skill Shortage visa. The Minister had formed the view that the applicant had provided incorrect answers and a bogus document in relation to their visa application, making it highly unlikely that the applicant was employed by FRFGC. The Tribunal was also required to consider its jurisdiction with respect to other applicants.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the first applicant had complied with the requirements of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), specifically concerning the provision of truthful information and genuine documents in their visa application. The Tribunal had to determine if the applicant's conduct constituted non-compliance under sections 101 or 103 of the Act, which would then engage the Minister's power to cancel the visa under section 109. A further issue was the Tribunal's jurisdiction concerning the other applicants.

The Tribunal found that it was not satisfied that there had been non-compliance by the first applicant in the manner described in the notice issued under section 107 of the Act. Although the Minister had suspected the provision of a bogus document and incorrect answers, the Tribunal accepted the applicant as a truthful witness and concluded that the discretionary power to cancel the visa did not arise. The Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision not to cancel the first applicant's visa. The Tribunal also determined that it had no jurisdiction with respect to the other applicants.