Heo (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the decision of a delegate to cancel Mr Ji Hyun Heo's Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The cancellation was based on the delegate's finding that Mr Heo had failed to comply with section 101(b) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by providing incorrect information in a previous visa application.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Heo had provided incorrect information in his application for a Subclass 417 Working Holiday (Extension) visa, and if so, whether this non-compliance warranted the cancellation of his subsequent Subclass 500 Student visa. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if Mr Heo had deliberately provided false information regarding his claimed regional work experience, which was a critical criterion for the grant of the Subclass 417 visa.

The Tribunal found that Mr Heo had deliberately provided incorrect information in his Subclass 417 visa application, stating he had undertaken three months of specified regional work when he had never worked for the named employer. This incorrect information was fundamental to the grant of the Subclass 417 visa. The Tribunal accepted that Mr Heo intentionally misled the Department to gain an immigration advantage. Despite a minor error in the date of the notice of intention to cancel, the Tribunal concluded that this did not disadvantage Mr Heo, as the core issue of providing false information remained. The Tribunal weighed the non-compliance against any hardship incurred by Mr Heo and found that the reasons for cancellation outweighed any mitigating factors.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to cancel Mr Heo's Subclass 500 (Student) visa.