Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Singh against the cancellation of his Subclass 186 Employer Nomination (Permanent) visa. The dispute arose from allegations that Mr Singh had provided incorrect information in previous visa applications, specifically regarding his name, immigration history, and previous visa compliance. The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Singh had indeed failed to comply with the relevant provisions of the Migration Act 1958, as particularised in the notice issued under section 107 of the Act, and if so, whether his visa should be cancelled.

The Tribunal considered whether the non-compliance alleged in the section 107 notice had occurred. The notice detailed that Mr Singh had indicated he had not been known by other names, had not been excluded from any country, and had not overstayed a visa. Evidence before the delegate suggested Mr Singh had previously used the name Amandeep Singh Aujla, had travelled to Australia on a student visa and subsequently remained unlawfully for over five years, and had been advised he was excluded from returning to Australia for three years. The Tribunal acknowledged that section 100 of the Act provides that an answer is incorrect even if the person did not know it was incorrect.

Despite finding that Mr Singh had indeed provided incorrect information in his visa applications, and therefore non-compliance as described in the section 107 notice, the Tribunal ultimately set aside the decision to cancel his visa. The Tribunal concluded that, having regard to all the relevant circumstances, the visa should not be cancelled. The decision under review was therefore set aside, with a substituted decision not to cancel Mr Singh's Subclass 186 visa.