Yao (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mr Yao, who held a Temporary Business Entry (Class UC) visa, Subclass 457 (Business (Long Stay)). The dispute concerned the Minister's decision to cancel Mr Yao's visa on the grounds that he had breached a condition requiring him to work only for his sponsor or an associated entity. Mr Yao had worked for a different business during a period of unpaid leave from his sponsoring employer.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the ground for cancellation existed, specifically whether Mr Yao had failed to comply with condition 8107(3)(a)(ii)(B) of his visa. If the ground for cancellation was established, the Tribunal then had to consider whether to exercise its discretion to cancel the visa, taking into account all relevant circumstances, including those raised by Mr Yao and relevant departmental policy.

The Tribunal found that the ground for cancellation was made out, as Mr Yao had worked for Quantum International, which had no association with his sponsor, Metwest Steel Pty Ltd, during his period of unpaid leave. Mr Yao did not dispute this fact, but provided reasons for his actions, including stress-related health problems, his wife's poor health, financial difficulties, and limited understanding of his visa conditions due to a language barrier. He also argued that returning to China would negatively impact his family's health and education. However, the Tribunal noted inconsistencies in his evidence regarding the reasons for ceasing work with his sponsor. After weighing the circumstances, the Tribunal concluded that the reasons for cancelling the visa outweighed the reasons for not cancelling it.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the first applicant's Subclass 457 visa. The Tribunal also stated that it had no jurisdiction with respect to the second named applicant.