Gurpreet Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to cancel the applicant's Subclass 010 (Bridging A) visa. The applicant, Mr Gurpreet Singh, an Indian national, had arrived in Australia in 2016 and had held various visas, including a Student visa and a Bridging A visa granted in conjunction with a Graduate visa application. He subsequently applied for a Student visa, which was refused, and was granted a second Bridging A visa pending the resolution of that application. This second Bridging A visa was the one that was cancelled. The applicant had not held a substantive visa since the cancellation and had been an unlawful non-citizen.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the ground for cancellation under s 116(1)(g) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was made out, and if so, whether the visa should be cancelled in the exercise of discretion. The cancellation was based on the applicant's criminal convictions, including 27 charges in January 2021 and five charges in September 2021. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's study record and the circumstances surrounding his applications and visa history, including a period as an unlawful non-citizen.

The Tribunal found that the ground for cancellation under s 116(1)(g) was established due to the applicant's criminal convictions. In considering the exercise of discretion, the Tribunal noted the applicant's immigration history, including his initial arrival as a dependent, his divorce, and his subsequent applications for further visas. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's explanation for his inability to study, which included a series of unforeseen events such as divorce, alleged migration fraud, a car accident, allegations of car theft, a house burglary, and the loss of his mobile phone. Crucially, the applicant failed to respond to a s 359A letter from the Tribunal, which provided him with a copy of the primary decision, details of his criminal history, and information regarding his study record, and warned him that failure to respond would result in the loss of his right to appear before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal adjourned the hearing to a date to be fixed. The applicant did not respond to the s 359A letter by the stipulated deadline of 20 December 2023, despite being granted an extension of time. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that the ground for cancellation was made out and, in light of the applicant's failure to engage with the process and provide a response to the information relied upon for the cancellation, affirmed the delegate's decision to cancel the applicant's Bridging A visa.