Hynes (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant whose Subclass 417 Working Holiday visa was cancelled. The dispute centred on allegations of non-compliance with the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) in relation to the applicant's visa application and subsequent declarations. The Tribunal, presided over by Member Tania Flood, was tasked with determining whether the cancellation decision was justified.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had failed to comply with sections 101(b) and 103 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), as particularised in the notice issued under section 107 of the Act. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant had provided incorrect information regarding specified work undertaken in a regional area, including the employer, location, and dates of employment, and whether any documents provided were considered "bogus" under the Act.

The Tribunal found that the notice issued under section 107 complied with statutory requirements and that the applicant had indeed failed to comply with the specified sections of the Act. The Tribunal reasoned that section 100 of the Act states that an answer is incorrect even if the person providing it did not know it was incorrect. Furthermore, section 103 prohibits the provision of bogus documents. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had provided incorrect information and potentially bogus documents in relation to his specified work, which constituted non-compliance. The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's visa.