Lin (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the cancellation of the applicant's Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The dispute arose from allegations of non-compliance with migration law, specifically providing incorrect information in a previous visa application. The applicant had previously held a Subclass 417 Working Holiday visa, which was granted based on information that was later found to be fabricated.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had contravened section 101(b) of the Migration Act 1958 by providing incorrect answers in their application for the Subclass 417 Working Holiday visa. This non-compliance, if established, could serve as a ground for cancelling their current Subclass 500 (Student) visa under section 107A of the Act, which permits the cancellation of a current visa due to non-compliance with a previous visa. The Tribunal also had to determine if the notice issued under section 107 of the Act complied with statutory requirements and if the delegate had reached the necessary state of mind to engage the cancellation power.

The Tribunal reasoned that section 99 of the Act deems any information provided in relation to a visa application as an answer to a question, and section 100 clarifies that an answer is incorrect even if the applicant was unaware of its inaccuracy. The Tribunal was satisfied that the notice issued under section 107 was valid and particularised the non-compliance with section 101(b) concerning the previous Working Holiday visa application. The Tribunal found that the applicant had provided incorrect information, specifically a fabricated work history, in their application for the Subclass 417 visa. Having found that there was non-compliance as described in the section 107 notice, and having considered all relevant circumstances, the Tribunal concluded that the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 500 (Student) visa should be affirmed.