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

This matter concerned an application for a Bridging E (Class WE) visa by CDGJ, who did not pass the character test due to serious fraud against vulnerable victims and demonstrated limited remorse. The dispute before Senior Member Rebecca Bellamy of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal was whether to exercise the discretion to refuse the application, considering Ministerial Direction No. 99.

The Tribunal was required to determine the weight to be given to various considerations under Ministerial Direction No. 99, specifically the strength, nature, and duration of the applicant's ties to Australia, and whether these, when balanced against other factors, warranted the exercise of the discretion to refuse the visa. The Tribunal also considered the potential impact of the decision on the applicant's spouse and step-family, and the applicant's own contributions to the Australian community.

Senior Member Bellamy reasoned that while the applicant had established a loving relationship with her Australian spouse and positive relationships with his adult children and grandchildren, and had made some positive contributions while incarcerated, these factors did not outweigh the seriousness of her past offending. The Tribunal noted that the applicant arrived in Australia as an adult, commenced offending within a year of arrival, and had no biological family in Australia. The Tribunal allocated significant weight in favour of refusing the visa due to the nature of the offending, concluding that the counter-veiling considerations did not outweigh the primary considerations favouring refusal.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review and exercised the discretion under s 501(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to refuse the visa application.