ADOBOR (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the cancellation of a Subclass 020 (Bridging B) visa held by the applicant, ADOBOR. The dispute arose after the Department of Home Affairs considered cancelling ADOBOR's visa under section 116(1)(e)(ii) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) following ADOBOR's charge with a criminal offence. ADOBOR contended that the notification letter regarding the potential cancellation was defective and that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the cancellation decision.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the ground for cancellation was established, specifically whether ADOBOR was or might be a risk to the health, safety, or welfare of an individual or individuals, and whether the Tribunal should exercise its discretion to set aside the cancellation decision. The Tribunal also had to determine if it had jurisdiction to review the cancellation, which it found it did under section 338(4) of the Act, despite ADOBOR's assertion of a defective notification letter.

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal considered the evidence before it, including the Department's Procedures Advice Manual (PAM3) which outlines factors relevant to the exercise of discretion. This included the purpose of ADOBOR's stay, compliance with visa conditions, potential hardship, the circumstances of the alleged offence, ADOBOR's conduct towards the Department, and potential mandatory legal consequences. The Tribunal also took into account ADOBOR's response to the notice of intention to cancel, his assertions that the charges were false, his bail conditions, and letters of support from various individuals and organisations. Despite ADOBOR's submissions and the evidence of his community involvement, the Tribunal concluded that the ground for cancellation was established and that the circumstances warranted affirming the cancellation decision.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel ADOBOR's Subclass 020 (Bridging B) visa.