Bebawy and Migration Agents Registration Authority

This matter concerned an application to review a decision by the Migration Agents Registration Authority (the Respondent) to cancel the registration of the Applicant as a migration agent. The Applicant had been registered since 2010, and the Respondent's decision to cancel this registration followed a series of complaints received between September 2016 and April 2018.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the Applicant was a person of integrity and a fit and proper person to provide immigration assistance, and whether the Applicant had dealt with clients competently, diligently, and fairly. These questions arose in the context of alleged breaches of various clauses of the Code of Conduct for Registered Migration Agents, including provisions relating to acting in accordance with the law, having due regard to a client's dependence on the agent's knowledge, not misleading the Authority, maintaining the integrity of the profession, and obligations regarding service agreements, fees, and record-keeping.

The court considered the Respondent's submissions that the Applicant had breached multiple clauses of the Code of Conduct, indicating systemic poor practices and serious, repeated breaches. The Applicant argued that while breaches of the Code might be warranted, a finding that they were not a person of integrity or fit and proper was not justified, suggesting an 18-month suspension as an appropriate alternative to cancellation. The court found that while there was no definitive finding that the Applicant was not a person of integrity or fit and proper, the repeated and serious breaches of the Code necessitated a significant period of restriction.

Ultimately, the court varied the Respondent's decision. Instead of affirming the cancellation, which would have resulted in a statutory bar from re-registration for five years, the court imposed a bar from registration until 15 August 2021. This represented a period of approximately 2.5 years from the date of the original cancellation decision, reflecting the seriousness of the breaches while not permanently precluding the Applicant from the profession.