Chhetri (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the cancellation of a Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa, Subclass 482, held by the applicant, Mr. Chhetri. The dispute arose because Mr. Chhetri ceased employment with his sponsoring business, Mesa 3 Pty Ltd, and the period he was unemployed exceeded the 60 consecutive days permitted by condition 8607(5) of his visa. The AAT also noted that the visas of Mr. Chhetri's wife and daughter were automatically cancelled as a consequence of his visa cancellation, but the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to review their cancellations as they were not the subject of a specific decision.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the delegate’s decision to cancel Mr. Chhetri’s visa should be affirmed. This required the Tribunal to determine if the ground for cancellation existed, specifically whether Mr. Chhetri had failed to comply with condition 8607(5) of his visa. If the ground for cancellation was established, the Tribunal then had to consider whether to exercise its discretion to cancel the visa, taking into account all relevant circumstances.

The Tribunal found that Mr. Chhetri did not comply with condition 8607(5) as he ceased employment on 22 November 2020 and remained unemployed for a period exceeding 60 consecutive days. Consequently, the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 was satisfied. In exercising its discretion, the Tribunal considered the applicant's submissions, including claims of abuse and exploitation by his former employer, and the potential for future sponsorship by another business. However, the Tribunal also had regard to the purpose of the Subclass 482 visa, which is for temporary skilled work, and the fact that Mr. Chhetri was not permitted to work in Australia on his current bridging visa. The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to cancel Mr. Chhetri's visa.