Hanley (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Hanley, who sought review of a decision to cancel their Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa, subclass 417. The dispute centred on allegations that the applicant had provided false information in their visa application, specifically regarding the completion of six months of regional work.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether there were grounds for cancellation under section 109 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and, if so, whether the visa should be cancelled. This involved assessing whether the applicant had failed to comply with the Act, as particularised in the notice issued under section 107, and whether the notice itself was valid. The Tribunal also had to consider the discretionary power to cancel the visa, weighing relevant factors including the applicant's response to the notice.

The Tribunal found that the notice issued under section 107 complied with statutory requirements and that the applicant had indeed failed to comply with section 101(b) of the Act. This conclusion was based on the applicant's visa application stating they had worked for Banana Exchange Pty Ltd for 190 days, a claim contradicted by correspondence from the company stating the applicant never worked there. The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant provided incorrect information to facilitate the grant of their visa, and that this constituted non-compliance as described in the notice.

Having found that relevant non-compliance occurred, the Tribunal then considered whether the visa should be cancelled. While cancellation under section 109 is discretionary, the Tribunal found that the applicant had provided incorrect information in their visa application. The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's visa.