Kaur v Minister for Immigration

The applicant, Ms Kaur, sought judicial review of a decision by the Migration Review Tribunal (MRT) which affirmed the cancellation of her subclass 457 visa. The visa was cancelled by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection under section 116 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) on the basis that Ms Kaur had breached condition 8107(3)(b) of her visa by ceasing employment for more than 90 consecutive days. The MRT had found that it had no jurisdiction regarding the other applicants, as their visa cancellations were automatic.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the MRT had erred in law in affirming the delegate's decision to cancel Ms Kaur's visa. This involved determining whether the MRT had correctly applied the law in considering the grounds for cancellation and in exercising its discretion to affirm the cancellation, particularly in light of the circumstances surrounding the cessation of employment and the applicant's subsequent claims.

Emmett J reasoned that the MRT had correctly identified that the power to cancel the visa under section 116(1)(b) was enlivened because Ms Kaur had ceased employment in breach of condition 8107(3)(b). The court found that the MRT had considered the applicant's claims regarding pressure from her sponsor and the subsequent complaints to ASIC and the police. However, the MRT gave these claims little weight, finding that the applicant had participated in improper activity to secure the nomination, which impacted the integrity of the migration program. The MRT also considered that the applicant did not require a subclass 457 visa to pursue her complaints and could apply for a bridging visa while awaiting the outcome of a subclass 186 visa application. The court concluded that the MRT's findings were open to it on the evidence and that it had not made an error of law in exercising its discretion to affirm the cancellation.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.