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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Haidas against the cancellation of his visa, which had been cancelled following a conviction for armed robbery and a subsequent term of imprisonment. The decision was heard by N A Manetta SM.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether to affirm or set aside the decision to cancel Mr Haidas' visa. The Tribunal was required to conduct a de novo review, meaning it had to consider all evidence and submissions afresh to make its own factual findings and determine the correct or preferable decision, rather than merely reviewing the delegate's decision for error.

The Tribunal reasoned that its role was to hear the matter afresh and make its own conclusions. In this instance, the Tribunal decided to set aside the visa cancellation decision and substitute a decision revoking the cancellation. This outcome was based on the evidence presented, which included Mr Haidas' statutory declaration detailing his upbringing in Australia since the age of five, his completion of schooling, and his employment history as an apprentice before his incarceration.