Onodera (Migration)

Case

[2019] AATA 4651

28 October 2019


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Onodera (Migration) [2019] AATA 4651 [2019] AATA 4651 28 October 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Shiori Onodera against the cancellation of her Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The cancellation was based on the delegate's finding that Ms Onodera had failed to comply with section 101(b) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by providing incorrect information in a previous visa application. Specifically, the delegate found that Ms Onodera had provided false information in her application for a Subclass 417 Working Holiday (Extension) visa, claiming to have undertaken specified work in regional Australia for three months when she had not.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms Onodera had complied with section 101(b) of the Act, which requires that no incorrect answers be given in a visa application. This involved determining whether the information provided by Ms Onodera regarding her regional work experience for the Subclass 417 visa application was indeed incorrect, and if so, whether this non-compliance warranted the cancellation of her Subclass 500 visa. The Tribunal also had to consider the prescribed matters under regulation 2.41 of the *Migration Regulations 1994* (Cth) in deciding whether to affirm the cancellation.

The Tribunal reasoned that Ms Onodera's claim of having worked for The Berry Farm Trust trading as The Big Berry (ABN 14330603229) from 26 January 2015 to 26 April 2015 was demonstrably false, as confirmed by a representative of that entity stating they had not employed any visa holders since July 2014. Consequently, the Tribunal found that Ms Onodera had not undertaken the specified regional work, nor had she worked in the Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing industry as claimed. The Tribunal concluded that the grant of the Subclass 417 visa was fundamentally based on this incorrect information, and had the correct information been known, the visa would not have been granted. The Tribunal found that Ms Onodera deliberately provided incorrect information to gain an immigration advantage and that the reasons for cancellation outweighed any reasons not to cancel.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel Ms Onodera's Subclass 500 (Student) visa.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Immigration

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction

  • Natural Justice

  • Appeal

  • Jurisdiction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

0