LIN (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision to cancel the Subclass 500 (Student) visa of the applicant, LIN. The dispute arose from allegations that the applicant had provided incorrect information in a previous application for a Working Holiday (Extension) (class TZ subclass 417) visa, specifically regarding undertaking specified work in regional Australia. The applicant did not appear at the hearing before the Tribunal, nor did they provide an explanation for their absence.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had failed to comply with sections 101 and 107A of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by providing incorrect information in their Working Holiday visa application. This non-compliance, if established, would form the basis for considering the cancellation of their current Student visa under section 109 of the Act. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the notice issued by the Department under section 107 of the Act was valid and complied with statutory requirements.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had breached section 101(b) of the Act by providing an incorrect answer to the question of whether they had undertaken specified work in regional Australia. This conclusion was based on evidence that the entity listed by the applicant as their employer had stated the applicant had never worked for them. The Tribunal was satisfied that the notice issued under section 107 complied with the Act and that the applicant had been given a fair opportunity to attend a hearing, despite their non-attendance and lack of explanation. The Tribunal applied the principle that an answer to a visa application question is considered incorrect even if the applicant was unaware it was incorrect, as per section 100 of the Act.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 500 (Student) visa.