1832718 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an appeal by an applicant against the cancellation of his Bridging E (Class WE) visa, Subclass 050. The dispute arose from the applicant being charged with several criminal offences, which formed the basis for the Minister's decision to cancel his visa under section 116(1)(g) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and regulation 2.43(1)(p)(ii) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation existed and, if so, whether the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised. This required the Tribunal to determine if the applicant had been charged with the specified criminal offences and to consider the relevant primary and secondary considerations outlined in Direction No. 63, which governs the cancellation of Bridging E visas under section 116(1)(g) when charged with certain offences.

The Tribunal found that the ground for cancellation was established, as the applicant had been charged with offences including using a carriage service to harass, threatening to inflict serious injury, possessing drugs of dependence, and stalking. While the applicant denied some aspects of the charges and explained the circumstances leading to his arrival in Australia and his application for a Safe Haven Enterprise Visa (SHEV), the Tribunal was satisfied that the charges themselves constituted a prescribed ground for cancellation. In exercising its discretion, the Tribunal applied Direction No. 63, weighing the government's view that such grounds should be applied rigorously against secondary considerations such as the degree of hardship the applicant might experience. The Tribunal concluded that, considering all the circumstances, the cancellation of the visa was warranted.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to cancel the applicant's Bridging E visa.