Lin (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a decision to cancel the Temporary Skill Shortage (Class GK) visa (Subclass 482) held by Mr. Lin. The cancellation was based on allegations of providing incorrect information and a bogus document, specifically concerning his skills, qualifications, and experience as a skilled meat worker. The Tribunal reviewed evidence including a MINTRAC skill assessment, an offer of employment from Southern Meats, a statement from the factory director, and various supporting letters.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr. Lin had failed to comply with sections 101 and 103 of the Migration Act 1958, as particularised in the notice issued under section 107 of the Act. Section 101 requires visa applicants to provide correct information, while section 103 prohibits the provision of bogus documents. The Tribunal had to determine if the information and documents provided by Mr. Lin were indeed incorrect or bogus, and if so, whether the visa cancellation was warranted.

The Tribunal found that while the notice issued under section 107 complied with statutory requirements and the delegate had reached the necessary state of mind to engage the cancellation power, the evidence did not establish non-compliance. Specifically, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the information provided was incorrect or that the document was bogus. The Tribunal noted that the information regarding Mr. Lin's employment and the authorisations for supporting documents were subject to some confusion, including a statement from an HR worker and the fact that the factory director, rather than an authorised signatory, had authored a certificate. However, after considering all the evidence, including statements and assessments, the Tribunal concluded that it was not satisfied that Mr. Lin had failed to comply with the relevant sections of the Act as alleged in the notice.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision to cancel Mr. Lin's visa and substituted a decision not to cancel it. The Tribunal also noted that it had no jurisdiction with respect to other applicants.