Shaik (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Shaik against the cancellation of his Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa, Subclass 485 (Skilled - Graduate). The visa had been granted to Mr Shaik as a secondary applicant, as a member of the family unit of the primary visa holder. The dispute arose because Mr Shaik's relationship with the primary visa holder had ceased.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the Subclass 485 visa should be cancelled, given that the ground for cancellation did not mandate it under section 116(3) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The Tribunal had to consider the exercise of its discretion in relation to the cancellation.

The Tribunal reasoned that the purpose of Mr Shaik's visa was to enable him to remain in Australia with his partner, but as the relationship had ended, he was no longer able to fulfil this purpose. Mr Shaik had not identified any compelling need for him to remain in Australia. While there was no evidence of non-compliance with visa conditions, and Mr Shaik stated no hardship would be caused by cancellation, the Tribunal found that the cessation of the relationship, without any indication of family violence, weighed heavily in favour of cancellation. The Tribunal acknowledged that cancellation would affect future visa options and potentially lead to departure from Australia.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel Mr Shaik's visa, concluding that, on the totality of the circumstances, cancellation was warranted.