2105615 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to cancel the applicant's Bridging A (Class WA) visa. The applicant had arrived in Australia on a tourist visa with the intention of applying for a protection visa, which was subsequently refused. While an application for review of that refusal was pending before the Tribunal, the applicant was convicted of several offences, including cultivating a prohibited plant and using electricity without authority, for which he received an intensive correction order. The Minister's delegate subsequently cancelled the applicant's Bridging A visa under section 116(1)(g) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), as the applicant had been convicted of an offence.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the decision to cancel the applicant's Bridging A visa should be affirmed. This required the Tribunal to determine if the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(g) of the Act, as prescribed by regulation 2.43(1)(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 visa should be cancelled, having regard to all relevant circumstances.

The Tribunal found that the applicant did not dispute his convictions. Therefore, the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(g) was satisfied. In considering the exercise of discretion, the Tribunal weighed various factors. It noted that the applicant had obtained his initial visitor visa for a purpose inconsistent with his actual intention to seek protection. However, it also gave weight in the applicant's favour to his pending review of the protection visa application and his assistance to the police with further investigations, acknowledging these as compelling reasons to remain in Australia. Despite these mitigating factors, the Tribunal concluded that the visa should be cancelled.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 010 (Bridging A) visa.