Feng (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant against the decision of the Minister to cancel their Subclass 187 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa. The dispute arose from allegations that the applicant had provided incorrect information and a bogus document in support of their visa application, specifically an IELTS certificate. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had failed to comply with the relevant provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and, if so, whether the visa cancellation decision should be affirmed.

The Tribunal considered whether the applicant had contravened sections 101 and 103 of the Act. Section 101 requires visa applicants to provide correct information, while section 103 prohibits the submission of bogus documents. The applicant had relied on an IELTS certificate to meet the English language requirements for their visa. However, the British Council subsequently advised that this certificate was not genuine, as the applicant had not undertaken the test and it had been completed by an impostor. The Tribunal also considered whether a valid notice under section 107 of the Act had been issued, which is a prerequisite for the exercise of the cancellation power under section 109.

The Tribunal found that the notice issued under section 107 complied with statutory requirements and that the applicant had been afforded an opportunity to respond to the allegations, which they chose not to do. Applying the definitions of "bogus document" and "incorrect answers" within the Act, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had provided a bogus document and, by doing so, had given incorrect answers in their visa application, thereby failing to comply with sections 101 and 103. The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's visa.