Ward (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by a visa holder against the cancellation of their Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visa. The applicant had applied for a second extension of this visa, claiming to have completed at least six months of specified work in a regional area while holding their first extension. However, subsequent verification checks by the Department of Home Affairs indicated that the claimed work had not been undertaken. The applicant did not respond to the Department's notice of intention to consider cancellation, leading to the visa being cancelled.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether there had been non-compliance with the requirements of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and, if so, whether the visa should be cancelled. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant provided incorrect answers in their visa application, thereby failing to comply with section 101(b) of the Act, and if the notice of intention to consider cancellation issued by the Department was valid and complied with the statutory requirements under section 107.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had indeed provided incorrect answers in their visa application, as the claimed specified work was not verified by the employer. The Tribunal was satisfied that the notice of intention to consider cancellation issued under section 107 of the Act was valid and complied with the statutory requirements. Applying section 109 of the Act, which permits the Minister to cancel a visa if a visa holder has failed to comply with certain provisions, including providing correct information in visa applications, the Tribunal concluded that the cancellation of the applicant's visa was justified.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 417 (Working Holiday) visa.