Patel (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant, Patel, against the cancellation of her Subclass (155) (Five Year Resident Return) visa. The cancellation was based on allegations of incorrect answers provided in her visa application, specifically concerning her husband's employer's address. The applicant contended that the employer's business did exist at the stated premises and that she intended to work for the nominator. The decision was made by Senior Member Michael Cooke of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had provided incorrect answers in her visa application, thereby triggering the Minister's power to cancel her visa under the Migration Act 1958. This involved determining if the information provided regarding her husband's employer's address constituted a failure to comply with the requirements of section 101 of the Act, which mandates that visa applications be completed without incorrect answers.

The Tribunal found that it was not satisfied that there had been non-compliance by the applicant in the manner described in the notice issued under section 107 of the Migration Act 1958. Consequently, the discretionary power to cancel the applicant's visa did not arise. The Tribunal therefore set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision not to cancel the applicant's visa.