BQHJ and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (Migration)

The applicant, BQHJ, sought judicial review of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs' decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his Class XB Subclass 204 Woman at Risk visa. The applicant did not pass the character test due to criminal offending. The core dispute concerned whether there was "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation decision, considering Ministerial Direction No. 79 and Australia's international non-refoulement obligations.

The court was required to determine the appropriate weight to be given to various considerations under Ministerial Direction No. 79, particularly the primary considerations of protection of the Australian community and the best interests of minor children, as well as other considerations including the applicant's personal circumstances and Australia's non-refoulement obligations. The court also had to assess whether the applicant's past trauma and his current circumstances constituted an "other reason" that warranted revocation of the visa cancellation.

The court reasoned that while the applicant had experienced significant trauma in Pakistan and had a difficult upbringing, these factors did not outweigh the seriousness of his offending, which included sexual crimes. The court applied the principles outlined in Ministerial Direction No. 79, noting that violent and sexual crimes are viewed very seriously, especially those against vulnerable individuals. The court found that the applicant's conduct, when assessed against the factors in the Direction, did not present a compelling case for revocation. The court also considered the applicant's non-refoulement obligations, but concluded that these did not necessitate revocation in this instance.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa was not revoked.