Searl-Eslor (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant against the cancellation of their Working Holiday (Temporary) (Class TZ) visa, Subclass 417. The dispute arose from allegations that the applicant had provided incorrect information in their visa application regarding specified work undertaken in regional Australia. The employer had reportedly stated they had no record of the applicant's employment, leading to the cancellation decision. The case was heard by Margie Bourke, a Member of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had failed to comply with the requirements of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by providing incorrect information in their visa application, and if so, whether the visa should be cancelled. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant had falsely claimed to have completed three months of specified work and provided false details about their employer and the nature of that employment, as alleged in the notice issued under section 107 of the Act.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had indeed provided incorrect information in their visa application, as described in the section 107 notice. This non-compliance related to the applicant's assertion of having undertaken three months of specified work and the details provided concerning that employment. However, the Tribunal considered the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including quarantine restrictions, and noted the applicant's employment in assisting with the delivery of COVID-19 vaccinations, which represented a significant contribution to the community. Having regard to these circumstances, the Tribunal concluded that the visa should not be cancelled.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision not to cancel the applicant’s Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visa.