Belmont and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (Migration)

The applicant, Belmont, sought review of the decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his Class TY Subclass 444 Special Category (temporary) visa. The Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs opposed the application. The matter was heard by Theodore Tavoularis SM in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa, as contemplated by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This required the Tribunal to consider the applicant's character, the nature and seriousness of his offending conduct, and the risk of future harm to the Australian community, in accordance with Ministerial Direction No. 99.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence regarding his substance abuse issues and the impact of COVID-19 on his circumstances, as well as his engagement with rehabilitation services and completion of various courses while in detention. However, the Tribunal found that the applicant's offending, which included multiple violent offences against female victims in the context of family violence, was "very serious" and fell squarely within the criteria outlined in paragraph 8.1.1(1)(a) of Ministerial Direction No. 99. The Tribunal also considered the risk of future harm, noting that while some of the applicant's earlier offending might not cause significant harm, the seriousness of his violent conduct meant that any risk of repetition was a significant concern.

The Tribunal concluded that the totality of the applicant's unlawful conduct reached a threshold of being "very serious" and that there was no "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa. Accordingly, the decision under review was affirmed.