this Procedural fairness (the fair hearing rule) problem question based on the notes: Aisha is a UK citizen who wishes to study in Australia. She applies for a student visa under the Migration Act. A person is ineligible for this category of visa if they have a serious criminal record, which is defined in the Act as 'a criminal conviction which resulted in the imposition of a sentence of more than 6 months imprisonment, or a fine equal to or greater than the equivalent of $1000 AUD'. In 2012, Aisha was convicted for assault and criminal damage (in London). She received a 2000 fine (which is more than $1000 AUD) and a 12 month good behaviour bond. Aisha decided not to disclose this information on her visa application, but the delegate deciding her application discovered it anyway, as it appeared on a database search. Accordingly, the delegate decided that Aisha was ineligible for a student visa. Aisha believes that there were extenuating circumstances that should have been taken into account - for example, that her convictions arose from a political protest known as the "Occupy London" movement, and that these were her first and only criminal convictions and she has otherwise been of exemplary character, taking part in volunteer work, etc. As she did not disclose her convictions, Aisha did not disclose this information. Has there been a denial of procedural fairness