2206412 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the cancellation of a Bridging E visa held by an Iranian national. The applicant had been charged with the offence of making a child amenable to sexual activity. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the ground for cancellation existed and, if so, whether the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised.

The legal issues before the Tribunal included whether the applicant's charge constituted a prescribed ground for visa cancellation under the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically regulation 2.43(1)(p)(ii), which relates to being charged with an offence. Furthermore, the Tribunal had to consider the exercise of discretion regarding cancellation, guided by Direction No. 63, which mandates consideration of specified primary and secondary factors.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had indeed been charged with a relevant offence, satisfying the ground for cancellation. In exercising its discretion, the Tribunal gave significant weight to the government's view that such grounds should be applied rigorously. It noted the applicant's conviction and the court's observations regarding the seriousness of the offence and the applicant's limited insight into his offending behaviour. While acknowledging potential hardship to the applicant, including impacts on his business and mental health, and considering the impact on his relationships, the Tribunal found these factors did not outweigh the public interest considerations and the seriousness of the offending conduct. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant's claims of fear of harm in returning to Iran had been legally exhausted.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Bridging E visa.