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

This matter concerned an application by FCFF (the Applicant) to review a mandatory visa cancellation decision made under section 501(3A) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The Applicant did not pass the character test, leading to the cancellation of his visa. The core of the dispute was whether there was "another reason" to revoke this cancellation, as contemplated by section 501CA(4)(b)(ii) of the Act. The decision was made by Linda Kirk SM in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine if there was a sufficient "another reason" to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation, notwithstanding that the Applicant failed the character test. This involved a careful consideration of the primary and other considerations outlined in Ministerial Direction No. 99, which guides decision-makers in such matters. The central legal issue was the proper application of the "weighing and balancing" exercise required by the Direction, and the significance to be attributed to various factors in determining whether the cancellation should be revoked.

The Tribunal's reasoning emphasised that the task of identifying "another reason" is not a mathematical exercise but an evaluative one, requiring persuasion of the decision-maker. It applied the principles established in cases such as *Demir v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs* and *Viane v The Minister for Immigration and Border Protection*, which highlight that a reason must carry sufficient weight or significance to warrant revocation. The Tribunal considered the primary consideration of protecting the Australian community, the nature and seriousness of the Applicant's conduct, and the risk of future offending. It also considered other relevant factors, including the Applicant's difficult early life experiences, his links to the Australian community, and the best interests of minor children in Australia. The Tribunal ultimately found that there was indeed another reason to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation.