2218493 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the cancellation of the applicant's Bridging E (Subclass 050) visa. The dispute arose after the applicant was charged with multiple criminal offences, including aggravated burglary, unlawful assault, and various contraventions of family violence orders, stemming from an incident involving his former partner. The applicant also had a history of mental health issues, including a risk of self-harm.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the grounds for visa cancellation under section 116(1)(g) of the Migration Act 1958 and regulation 2.43(1)(p)(ii) of the Migration Regulations 1994 were made out. If so, the Tribunal then had to consider whether to exercise its discretion to cancel the visa, having regard to all relevant circumstances, including the Minister's Direction No. 63.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal accepted the applicant's evidence and considered the primary and secondary considerations outlined in Minister's Direction No. 63. While acknowledging the government's view that prescribed grounds for cancellation should be applied rigorously, the Tribunal also gave significant weight to the best interests of children under 18 in Australia who would be affected by the cancellation. The Tribunal also took into account the impact on the family unit, the hardship to the visa holder, the circumstances of the ground for cancellation, and the possible consequences of cancellation. After weighing all these factors, the Tribunal concluded that the visa should not be cancelled.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision to cancel the applicant's Bridging E visa and substituted a decision not to cancel it.