Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Singh against the cancellation of his Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, Subclass 573 (Higher Education Sector). The visa was cancelled by the Department on the grounds that Mr Singh had breached condition 8202 of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically by failing to be enrolled in a registered course of study from 29 March 2016. Mr Singh did not attend the hearing before the Tribunal, having notified them that he had left Australia and that his father was ill. The Tribunal proceeded to make a decision in his absence, having satisfied itself that he had been properly invited to the hearing.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Singh had breached condition 8202 of his visa, which required him to be enrolled in a registered course. If a breach was found, the Tribunal then had to consider whether to exercise its discretion to cancel the visa under section 116(1) of the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunal was required to consider various factors in exercising this discretion, including the purpose of the visa, the applicant's compelling need to remain in Australia, the extent of compliance with other visa conditions, the hardship that cancellation might cause, the circumstances of the breach, and the applicant's conduct towards the Department.

The Tribunal found that Mr Singh had indeed breached condition 8202(2) as he was not enrolled in a registered course from 29 March 2016, a fact confirmed by PRISMS records and implicitly by Mr Singh himself. In considering the discretion to cancel, the Tribunal noted that Mr Singh had ceased study and left Australia, providing no evidence of a compelling need to remain. While he had complied with other visa conditions, his explanation for the breach, citing poor mental health and financial problems, lacked substantiation. The Tribunal also found his level of communication with the Department and the Tribunal to be low. Given the lack of evidence of hardship and the unsubstantiated nature of his reasons for non-compliance, the Tribunal concluded that the visa cancellation was affirmed.