CHEN (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant whose Subclass 500 (Student) visa was cancelled. The applicant claimed that their migration agent was responsible for providing a bogus document and incorrect information in their visa application.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had failed to comply with sections 101 and 103 of the Migration Act 1958, which require visa applicants to provide correct information and not to submit bogus documents, and if so, whether the visa cancellation decision should be affirmed. The Tribunal also considered whether the notice issued under section 107 of the Act, detailing the alleged non-compliance, was valid.

The Tribunal found that the notice issued under section 107 was valid and that the applicant had indeed failed to comply with sections 101 and 103 of the Act. This conclusion was based on evidence that the certificate of a Bachelor of Business in Economics provided by the applicant did not match the records of Auckland University of Technology, and that the certificate itself showed signs of alteration consistent with other fraudulent documents. The Tribunal applied the principles that an applicant must ensure all information provided is correct and that bogus documents must not be submitted, noting that section 100 of the Act deems an answer incorrect even if the applicant was unaware of the inaccuracy.

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