Kaur (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for judicial review of a delegate's decision to cancel the applicant's Bridging B (Class WB) visa under s 116 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The applicant, Harsimran Kaur, a citizen of India, had been in Australia since 2009 and had lodged multiple applications for substantive visas, each of which had been refused and subsequently affirmed on review or appeal through various courts, including the Federal Court and the High Court. The Bridging B visa in question was granted on 7 June 2018.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicant's Bridging B visa should have been cancelled, and whether the delegate had properly exercised their discretion in doing so. Specifically, the court had to consider the grounds upon which the Bridging B visa was granted, namely that the applicant had an outstanding migration matter and that her application for judicial review of a substantive visa refusal had not been finalised. The court also considered the applicant's submissions regarding her length of residence, study, and job placements in Australia, and her lack of awareness that her High Court special leave application had been deemed abandoned.

The court reasoned that the Bridging B visa was granted on the basis that the applicant had an outstanding judicial review proceeding. However, the applicant's appeal to the High Court had been deemed abandoned on 16 May 2016 due to non-compliance with court rules, meaning the judicial review proceedings were, in fact, finalised at that earlier date. The court held that the applicant's lack of awareness of this fact did not alter the reality that the grounds for the grant of the visa no longer existed. Consequently, the delegate was entitled to cancel the visa under s 116 of the Act. The court found that the delegate had properly considered the relevant factors and exercised their discretion appropriately.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 020 (Bridging B) visa.