Dichoso (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the cancellation of a Regional Employer Nomination (Permanent) (Class RN) visa, Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme), held by Mr. Dichoso. The cancellation was based on the ground that incorrect information had been provided in the visa application. The core of the dispute revolved around whether there was a legal impediment to Mr. Dichoso's travel, specifically concerning his parental rights and responsibilities towards his children, and whether the AAT had properly exercised its discretion in upholding the cancellation.

The AAT was required to determine whether the biological mother of Mr. Dichoso's children possessed parental rights under Philippine law, and if her lack of express consent or authorisation for the children to remain in Australia constituted a legal impediment to their travel. Furthermore, the Tribunal had to assess whether the children's expressed desires to remain in Australia were a relevant factor in the exercise of discretion regarding the visa cancellation.

In its reasoning, the AAT found that the biological mother did indeed hold parental rights under the law of the Philippines. Crucially, it was established that she had not provided her express consent or authorisation for the children to remain in Australia, which the Tribunal determined created a legal impediment to their travel. The AAT also acknowledged the children's wishes to remain in Australia as a factor to be considered. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the decision under review, which upheld the cancellation of Mr. Dichoso's visa, was affected by an error of law and was therefore set aside.