The nomination was approved, the visa was granted, the start date was Monday. On Sunday night the worker rang from a room at Sydney Airport to say the visa had been cancelled and they were being put on a flight. We have taken that call more than once. A decision of the Federal Circuit and Family Court on 16 October 2026 shows how it happens and the one procedural step that must be done properly.
In short: A wrong answer on the incoming passenger card is a lawful ground to cancel a visa at the border. In Zhang (No 2) the cancellation was quashed because the notice was shown, signed and taken back within a minute. For a sponsor, the worker's visa and the nomination are separate, and the obligations keep running while the worker is on the plane home.
What happened in Zhang
| Step | What the summary records |
|---|---|
| Arrival, 3 October 2026 | A student visa holder ticks no to goods over $900 on the passenger card |
| Baggage check | Goods worth $8,471.95 are found |
| Interview | The delegate reads the notice aloud for nearly nine minutes through a telephone interpreter, who then summarises |
| 10.15am | She signs the notice. The delegate takes it back within a minute. She never has a copy while deciding how to respond |
| Decision | Visa cancelled under section 116(1)(d) for an incorrect answer contrary to section 102 |
| Court, 16 October 2026 | Cancellation quashed. The notice was never handed to her, so section 119 was not complied with. Costs of $20,000 against the Minister |
Two of her three arguments failed. The goods question is within section 102, and the weight given to the wrong answer was not irrational. She won on procedure alone.
Where this lands on the employer
We see three questions from sponsors when a worker is cancelled on arrival. Each has a migration answer and a commercial one.
The visa and the nomination are separate decisions. Cancellation of the visa does not itself cancel an approved nomination, but a nomination has a life and conditions of its own, and the worker's ability to be granted a new visa depends on what the cancellation did to their record. The sponsorship obligations, including notification of a change in circumstances, continue. Our note on sponsor records covers the paper trail the Department will ask for.
If the cancellation was procedurally defective, as in Zhang, judicial review can quash it, and the worker is restored to the position before the decision. If the cancellation stands, a fresh visa application faces the cancellation on the record and possibly an exclusion period. The commercial reality is that either path takes months, and the role may not wait. We advise sponsors to decide early whether to hold the position or re-recruit.
Check the contract before the worker lands, not after. If employment was to commence on arrival, the usual position is that no employment began, but a contract that was signed and dated earlier may have created obligations. Any relocation money advanced, flights paid or accommodation leased should be dealt with under the contract's own terms, and any clawback clause read carefully before it is relied on.
What to tell every arriving worker
Our migration practice page sets out the sponsorship process end to end, and our note on the student visa reforms explains why a worker who loses a visa now has fewer onshore options than before.
A fork for the sponsor
The worker has just called from the airport. What happened in the interview?
Timeline for the sponsor
- Day 0The call from the airport. Instruct the worker on documents and times. Note the time of notification.
- Day 1Request the record of interview and audio. Review the contract and any money advanced. Notify the Department of the change in circumstances within the required time.
- Week 1Decide with advice whether judicial review is open. The limits are short.
- Week 2 onwardHold or re-recruit. If re-recruiting, labour market testing starts again.
Could the Department run the process again and cancel properly?
The Court quashed the decision because of the procedure. It did not decide whether a fresh, properly conducted process could reach the same result. The ground, an incorrect answer on the card, was upheld as valid.
Case facts from Zhang (No 2) [2026] FedCFamC2G 2046 as summarised in MIA Notice 24 of 23 October 2026; the judgment was not publicly accessible when this note was written.
Frequently asked questions
Does a visa cancellation at the border cancel our nomination?
Not by itself. The visa and the nomination are separate decisions, but the worker's ability to obtain a new visa depends on the cancellation, and the sponsorship obligations continue.
Can a border cancellation be challenged?
Yes, on judicial review for legal error. In Zhang the cancellation was quashed because the notice was never handed to the worker. Time limits run from notification.
What is the $900 question?
The incoming passenger card asks whether the traveller carries goods worth more than $900. The Court confirmed an incorrect answer is a ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(d).
What should we do about the employment contract?
Read it before the worker lands. Whether employment began, and what happens to any money advanced, turns on its terms. Clawback clauses should be checked before they are relied on.
General information as at 25 October 2026. Not legal advice. Outcomes depend on the facts of each case.