1926833 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to cancel the applicant's Bridging A (Class WA) visa. The applicant, who had arrived in Australia in March 2015 and subsequently applied for a Protection visa, was granted the Bridging A visa while that application was being processed. The delegate had cancelled the Bridging A visa on the ground that the applicant had been convicted of criminal offences, including driving offences, common assault, and contravention of an apprehended violence order. The applicant sought to have this cancellation decision reviewed by the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation, as prescribed by section 116(1)(g) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and regulation 2.43(oa) of the Migration Regulations 1994, was made out. If the ground was established, the Tribunal then had to consider whether, in the exercise of its discretion, the applicant's Bridging A visa should be cancelled, having regard to all relevant circumstances. This involved weighing the seriousness of the convictions against factors such as the applicant's remorse, efforts to address behavioural and alcohol issues, the pending review of his Protection visa application, and the potential hardship his cancellation might cause.

The Tribunal was satisfied that the ground for cancellation existed, as the applicant acknowledged his criminal convictions. As the ground did not mandate cancellation, the Tribunal proceeded to consider its discretion. It noted that the applicant's purpose for remaining in Australia was to pursue his Protection visa review, which could constitute a compelling need to remain, although the possibility of applying for a Bridging Visa E or continuing the review from immigration detention was also acknowledged. The Tribunal found that the applicant's criminal conduct demonstrated a chronic disregard for the law, which weighed heavily against him. Despite expressions of remorse and steps taken to address his issues, the Tribunal concluded that these factors did not outweigh the seriousness of his convictions and the need to uphold the law.

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