FTYC and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by FTYC (the applicant) to review a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to refuse her visa. The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the character requirements for a visa, specifically whether she possessed a "substantial criminal record" as defined by the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) heard the case.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary issues: first, whether the applicant passed the character test under section 501 of the Act, and second, if she did not pass the character test, whether the decision to refuse her visa was the preferable decision. The applicant had been sentenced to seven years and six months imprisonment for importing a marketable quantity of heroin, which the Tribunal found constituted a "substantial criminal record" under section 501(7) of the Act, meaning she failed the character test.

In considering whether the visa refusal was the preferable decision, the Tribunal had regard to Direction No. 65, which outlines government policy on visa refusal and cancellation. The Tribunal applied the principles within the Direction, acknowledging Australia's sovereign right to determine entry and residency, the community's expectation that serious offenders will be refused entry, and the low tolerance for criminal conduct by non-citizens. The Tribunal found that the applicant's substantial criminal record meant she did not pass the character test, and that the decision to refuse her visa was the preferable one.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.