Jasick and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Migrant Services (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Jasick, a seventy-one-year-old applicant from the United States, for the non-revocation of a mandatory cancellation of his Class 155 Five Year Resident Return Visa. The cancellation was triggered by Mr Jasick failing to pass the character test due to his conviction for dangerous operation of a vehicle causing death, and driving with a middle-range blood alcohol content. Mr Jasick also had a prior, albeit minor, traffic offence and a breach of a domestic violence order recorded as a no conviction. The court was required to determine whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation decision, considering Ministerial Direction No. 90.

The court was tasked with applying the principles outlined in Ministerial Direction No. 90, specifically focusing on the protection of the Australian community. This involved assessing the nature and seriousness of Mr Jasick's conduct, the risk he posed to the community of reoffending or engaging in further serious conduct, and whether there were any other compelling reasons to revoke the cancellation. The Direction mandates that decision-makers give particular regard to the privilege of remaining in Australia and the expectation that non-citizens will be law-abiding and not cause harm.

In its reasoning, the court examined the sentencing remarks of the District Court of Queensland, which detailed the circumstances of the fatal vehicle accident. The court also considered the evidence regarding Mr Jasick's remorse and the risk of reoffending, including a psychological report. Despite submissions challenging the completeness of the information available to the psychologist, the court was satisfied that the psychologist had considered all relevant evidence, including the discrepancy between the applicant's perception of the events and the factual circumstances. The court found that Mr Jasick posed a low risk of reoffending, noting his lack of a driver's licence and his stated intention not to drive.

The court set aside the decision under review and substituted it with a decision to revoke the mandatory cancellation of Mr Jasick's visa.