Jaspreet Singh (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Jaspreet Singh, who sought review of the decision to cancel his Subclass 573 Higher Education Sector visa. The cancellation was based on the applicant's alleged failure to comply with condition 8516 of his visa, which requires the holder to maintain enrolment in a course that would satisfy the criteria for the visa grant.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation, specifically the failure to comply with condition 8516, was established. This involved determining if the applicant had maintained enrolment in a principal course of a kind specified for the Subclass 573 visa, as required by the Migration Regulations 1994. The Tribunal also had to consider whether, if the ground for cancellation was made out, the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised, taking into account all relevant circumstances.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's enrolment in a Bachelor of Business was cancelled on 22 June 2016, meaning he was not enrolled or the subject of a current offer of enrolment in a specified principal course from that date. This established the ground for cancellation under s.116(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958. However, the Tribunal then considered the exercise of discretion. It noted the applicant's explanation for the enrolment changes, including a change of campus and subsequent transfer to a different provider, which led to his enrolment being cancelled. While there were inconsistencies in his explanations regarding his awareness of condition 8516 and the reasons for enrolment cancellation, the Tribunal had regard to his subsequent actions to rectify the situation, including enrolling in new courses and a Bachelor of Business, and his stated intention to pursue a new study pathway. The Tribunal also considered the personal circumstances of the applicant, including the financial sacrifices made by his family and the potential impact on his mother's health if his visa were cancelled.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that, considering all the circumstances, the visa should not be cancelled. It set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision not to cancel the applicant's Subclass 573 visa.