Ranveer Kaur (Migration)

This matter concerned the review of a decision to cancel the Subclass 119 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa granted to the applicant, Ranveer Kaur. The applicant was a secondary applicant to her husband’s primary visa application. The dispute arose from departmental investigations which indicated that the applicant had provided incorrect information and bogus documents in support of her visa application, specifically by using her cousin's identity to marry her brother to facilitate the visa grant.

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant had failed to comply with the requirements of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) regarding the provision of correct information and the use of genuine documents in her visa application. The court was also required to consider the exercise of the Minister's discretion to cancel the visa, including whether the best interests of the applicant's Australian citizen child were adequately considered, and whether the notice of intention to cancel the visa complied with the statutory requirements.

The court found that the applicant had indeed failed to comply with the Act by providing incorrect information and potentially bogus documents, as evidenced by investigations with Indian authorities. The court noted that the applicant had used her cousin's identity to marry her brother, and that a Permanent Account Number card obtained under her true identity predated the card obtained under the assumed identity. The court also considered the validity of the Notice of Intention to Cancel Visa (NOICC) and found it to be a valid notice under section 107 of the Act, containing sufficient particulars. While the best interests of the child were considered, the court found no evidence regarding the husband's intentions if the visa were cancelled, and ultimately affirmed the cancellation decision.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 119 (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme) visa.