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

The applicant, GVQH, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs to affirm the mandatory cancellation of his Class TY Subclass 444 Special Category visa. The dispute centred on whether there was "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation, as contemplated by section 501CA(4) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), having regard to Ministerial Direction No. 79. The matter was heard by R Maguire M.

The court was required to determine whether the Tribunal had erred in its application of Ministerial Direction No. 79 when considering the applicant's criminal conduct and other factors to decide whether to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa. Specifically, the court needed to assess how the Tribunal weighed the primary considerations, including the protection of the Australian community, the best interests of minor children, and other considerations, against the applicant's circumstances.

The Tribunal's reasoning, as outlined in the decision, indicated that Primary Consideration A (protection of the Australian community) weighed "extremely heavily" in favour of non-revocation, while Primary Consideration C (best interests of minor children) also weighed "heavily" in favour of non-revocation. Primary Consideration B (best interests of the applicant) carried only "limited weight" in favour of revocation. The Tribunal concluded that even when combined, the "Other Considerations" in favour of revocation could not outweigh the significant weight given to Primary Considerations A and C. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the application of the Direction favoured the non-revocation of the visa cancellation.

The final outcome of the decision was that the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa was not revoked.