2106834 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the cancellation of the applicant's Bridging C (Class WC) visa, Subclass 030. The dispute arose from the Minister's decision to cancel the visa on the grounds that the applicant had been convicted of criminal offences. The applicant sought review of this decision by the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(g) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was established, and if so, whether the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised. This involved determining if the applicant had been convicted of offences prescribed by regulation 2.43(oa) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth). If the ground was established, the Tribunal then had to consider all relevant circumstances, including government policy and matters raised by the applicant, in deciding whether to affirm the cancellation.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had a significant criminal history, including convictions for possessing prohibited drugs, various traffic offences, and multiple instances of dishonestly obtaining financial advantage or property by deception. The Tribunal also noted outstanding criminal charges against the applicant. Despite the applicant's explanations for some of these offences, including claims of employee misconduct and the nature of his employment, the Tribunal was satisfied that the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(g) was made out. In exercising its discretion, the Tribunal had regard to the applicant's immigration history, including previous visa refusals and unsuccessful merits reviews, as well as the applicant's stated reasons for wishing to remain in Australia, such as supporting his sister and the impending birth of his child. However, the Tribunal concluded that the repeated and sustained nature of the applicant's criminal history weighed heavily against him.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 030 (Bridging C) visa.