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

The matter before the Tribunal concerned the Applicant's application for the revocation of a mandatory visa cancellation. The Applicant had failed to pass the character test due to a substantial criminal record, specifically convictions for sexual crimes against women and children, with offending conduct spanning several years. The Applicant, who had been a resident of Australia for almost seven decades and was of advanced age, argued that there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation decision.

The legal issue before the Tribunal was whether, in light of Ministerial Direction No. 99, there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the Applicant's visa. This required the Tribunal to consider the Applicant's strong ties to Australia, the interests of minor children, impediments to his return to his country of origin, and other additional considerations, weighed against the protection of the Australian community. The Tribunal was also required to assess the Applicant's recidivist risk, considering the nature and seriousness of his past conduct and the risk of future offending.

The Tribunal found the Applicant's evidence regarding his offending to be implausible and self-serving, ultimately rejecting it in favour of the court findings of guilt. However, the Tribunal acknowledged some evolution in the Applicant's evidence, including a concession that consent should have been obtained and procedures better explained, and a subsequent letter expressing remorse and accepting responsibility for his actions and their impact. Applying Ministerial Direction No. 99, the Tribunal considered the primary consideration of protecting the Australian community, noting the seriousness of violent and sexual crimes against women and children. It also considered the "other considerations," including legal consequences, impediments to removal, and impact on victims. The Tribunal found that the Applicant's advanced age, long residency in Australia, strong community ties, and the interests of minor children, among other factors, outweighed the protection of the Australian community in this specific case.

Consequently, the Tribunal determined that there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the Applicant's visa. The decision under review was set aside and substituted with a decision to revoke the mandatory cancellation.