2203297 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) to affirm the cancellation of the applicant's protection visa. The grounds for cancellation under section 116(1)(g) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) arose from the applicant's convictions for offences including armed with intent to commit an indictable offence, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and destroy or damage property, as well as being the subject of an apprehended violence order.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the AAT had erred in exercising its discretion to cancel the applicant's visa, notwithstanding the existence of the ground for cancellation. This involved considering the seriousness of the applicant's criminal offending, the applicant's non-refoulement obligations, and other relevant considerations, including lawful government policy and matters raised by the applicant.

The court found that the AAT had properly considered the relevant factors in exercising its discretion. The Tribunal was satisfied that the ground for cancellation existed and, as it did not mandate cancellation, the Tribunal proceeded to consider its discretion. The AAT had regard to lawful government policy and other relevant considerations, and was satisfied that the applicant had a meaningful opportunity to present arguments and evidence. The Tribunal also considered the circumstances of the case, including matters raised by the applicant and the Department's Procedures Advice Manual. The applicant's claims regarding lack of understanding of the cancellation notice, lack of interpreter, and difficulties in obtaining migration legal advice were considered by the Tribunal within the context of the applicant's criminal history and the AVO. The Tribunal noted the applicant had no prior convictions before these offences.

The court affirmed the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.