Rasool (Migration)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 191
•31 January 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Rasool (Migration) [2018] AATA 191
[2018] AATA 191
31 January 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by a visa holder against the cancellation of his Subclass 572 Vocational Education and Training Sector student visa. The dispute arose because the applicant was no longer enrolled in a registered course of study, thereby breaching a condition of his visa. The decision was made by the Tribunal.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation under s.116(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was established, and if so, whether the Tribunal should exercise its discretion to cancel the visa. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant had breached condition 8202(2)(a) of his visa, which required him to be enrolled in a registered course.
The Tribunal found that the applicant had breached condition 8202(2)(a) as he had ceased to be enrolled in a registered course of study on 30 October 2015, when his enrolment in an Advanced Diploma of Business, a Diploma of Human Resources, and a Certificate IV in Human Resources were all cancelled. While this ground did not mandate cancellation, the Tribunal then considered its discretion. The applicant had not responded to the Notice of Intention to Consider Cancellation. He later provided a prescription, evidence of fee disputes with his education provider, and medical evidence concerning his mother. He also provided a conditional offer for a new course, but his enrolment was not accepted due to an inability to obtain a Letter of Release. The Tribunal noted the applicant's explanation of a fraud by a teacher regarding outstanding fees, but also observed that the PRISMS system cited "unsatisfactory course progress" as the reason for enrolment cancellation. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that, considering all circumstances, the visa should be cancelled.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant’s Class TU visa.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation under s.116(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was established, and if so, whether the Tribunal should exercise its discretion to cancel the visa. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant had breached condition 8202(2)(a) of his visa, which required him to be enrolled in a registered course.
The Tribunal found that the applicant had breached condition 8202(2)(a) as he had ceased to be enrolled in a registered course of study on 30 October 2015, when his enrolment in an Advanced Diploma of Business, a Diploma of Human Resources, and a Certificate IV in Human Resources were all cancelled. While this ground did not mandate cancellation, the Tribunal then considered its discretion. The applicant had not responded to the Notice of Intention to Consider Cancellation. He later provided a prescription, evidence of fee disputes with his education provider, and medical evidence concerning his mother. He also provided a conditional offer for a new course, but his enrolment was not accepted due to an inability to obtain a Letter of Release. The Tribunal noted the applicant's explanation of a fraud by a teacher regarding outstanding fees, but also observed that the PRISMS system cited "unsatisfactory course progress" as the reason for enrolment cancellation. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that, considering all circumstances, the visa should be cancelled.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant’s Class TU visa.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Breach
-
Jurisdiction
-
Natural Justice
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Rasool (Migration) [2018] AATA 191
Cases Citing This Decision
0