Le (Migration)

This matter concerned the affirmation of a decision to cancel the applicant's Partner (Residence) (Class BS) visa, Subclass 801 (Spouse). The dispute arose from allegations that the applicant had provided incorrect answers in his visa application, specifically concerning his relationship with his sponsor. The applicant and his sponsor were cousins, a fact that was not disclosed at the time of their marriage. The applicant claimed he was unaware of this familial connection until after he had arrived in Australia, despite living in the same village and having mothers who were sisters. The Tribunal considered evidence from witnesses who attested to the genuineness of the relationship.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had failed to comply with the requirements of section 109(1) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by providing incorrect information in his visa application. This section permits the Minister to cancel a visa if the holder has failed to comply with provisions requiring the provision of correct information and notification of any inaccuracies. A further issue was whether the notice issued under section 107 of the Act, which initiates the cancellation process, complied with statutory requirements.

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. The applicant's assertion of ignorance regarding his familial relationship with the sponsor was found to be implausible, particularly given the size of their shared village and the fact that their mothers were sisters. The Tribunal was satisfied that the delegate had properly engaged section 107 and that the notice issued under that section was valid. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had provided incorrect information in his visa application, thereby failing to comply with the Act.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 801 visa.