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

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of HTRT (the Applicant) and the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, and Multicultural Affairs (the Respondent). The dispute concerned the mandatory cancellation of the Applicant's visa, which had been cancelled by a delegate of the Minister because the Applicant failed to pass the character test due to a substantial criminal record. The Applicant sought to have this cancellation revoked.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the Applicant's visa, as required by section 501CA(4)(b)(ii) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This determination necessitated a consideration of the primary and other considerations outlined in Direction No. 99, which guides decision-makers on the protection of the Australian community, the nature and seriousness of the Applicant's offending, the risk to the community, the strength and duration of the Applicant's ties to Australia, the best interests of any children involved, community expectations, and the impediments to removal.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the Applicant did not dispute failing the character test due to his substantial criminal record, including a sentence of three years and nine months imprisonment for aggravated home burglary and causing bodily harm, the central question was whether to revoke the cancellation. In applying Direction No. 99, the Tribunal weighed the primary considerations, including the protection of the Australian community against the Applicant's significant ties to Australia, having arrived at age 14 and being 28 at the time of the hearing, with immediate family residing in Australia. The Tribunal also considered the considerable impediments the Applicant would face if returned to Zimbabwe. Ultimately, the Tribunal found that there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation.

The Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation and substituted a new decision revoking the cancellation.