Ciervo (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the cancellation of the applicant's Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa, Subclass 417. The applicant had provided incorrect answers in her visa application, leading to a notice of intention to cancel her visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had failed to comply with section 101(b) of the Migration Act 1958, which requires visa applicants to provide no incorrect answers in their applications. The Tribunal also had to determine if the notice issued under section 107 of the Act was valid and if the visa should be cancelled based on the identified non-compliance.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had indeed provided incorrect information in her application regarding her prior specified work experience in regional Australia, which was a criterion for the grant of her extension visa. The Tribunal was satisfied that the notice of intention to cancel was valid and that the delegate had properly engaged section 107. Despite the applicant's explanation that she was desperate and made a mistake due to the difficulties she faced in finding work during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Tribunal concluded that the incorrect answers were relied upon, in part, for the grant of the visa.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 417 visa, finding that the grounds for cancellation outweighed any grounds for not cancelling the visa.