Umer (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by Dr Sophia Umer against the Minister's delegate's decision to cancel her subclass 155 (Five Year Resident Return) visa. The cancellation was based on the delegate's finding that the applicant had failed to comply with sections 101 and 103 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by providing incorrect information and bogus documents in relation to her skilled visa application, specifically concerning her educational qualifications and workplace experience. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had indeed non-complied with these provisions and, if so, whether the visa should be cancelled.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's role in the community as a General Practitioner and her responsibilities as a mother and carer for her two daughters, who were integrated into Australian society and pursuing their education. These factors were weighed heavily against cancelling the visa. However, the Tribunal also noted the applicant's continued assertion of the genuineness of her qualifications and employment claims, despite the Tribunal's finding that the supporting documentation was demonstrably false and bogus. This persistence was considered to demonstrate a significant disdain and disregard for Australia's migration laws, weighing in favour of cancellation. The Tribunal found that the provision of false and misleading information in the applicant's skilled visa application involved an element of fraud or deception, attracting the operation of Public Interest Criterion 4020(1).

Ultimately, the Tribunal found that the applicant played an important ongoing role in her local community and that the time elapsed since the non-compliance was a relevant consideration. Despite the serious concerns regarding the applicant's continued assertions of the genuineness of false information, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review.