Liu (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant, Ms. Liu, against the cancellation of her Subclass 888 (Business Innovation and Investment (Permanent)) visa. The cancellation was based on the applicant's father's visa application, which incorrectly stated that Ms. Liu had never been in a de facto relationship. At the time of the father's application, Ms. Liu had been in a de facto relationship for approximately three and a half years, which later led to her marriage and a partner visa application. The decision under review was made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the discretion to cancel Ms. Liu's visa should be exercised, given the circumstances surrounding the incorrect information provided in her father's application. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the incorrect statement was a result of a failure to comply with the requirement that visa applications be correct, and if so, whether there were sufficient grounds to depart from the usual course of cancellation.

The Tribunal found that the incorrect information in the father's application was provided by an agent and staff using information from a previous application and from the parents, and was not adequately checked by Ms. Liu. It was noted that the parents were unaware of the Australian concept of a de facto relationship. Despite being in a relationship, Ms. Liu was financially dependent on her parents at the time. The Tribunal considered that Ms. Liu was now working and purchasing a house, and that her child was an Australian citizen. Applying the principles of administrative review, the Tribunal determined that the decision to cancel the visa was not sound.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision not to cancel Ms. Liu's Subclass 888 visa.