Kostopoulos and Minister for Home Affairs (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Kostopoulos to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa, which had been triggered by his substantial criminal record, history of drug use, and participation in a criminal group involved in the supply of prohibited drugs. The Minister for Home Affairs opposed the revocation. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether there were sufficient "other reasons" to revoke the mandatory cancellation, considering the protection of the Australian community, the best interests of any minor children in Australia, community expectations, the applicant's ties to Australia, and the impediments to his removal.

The Tribunal's reasoning was heavily guided by the principles established in *Aciek* and other Federal Court decisions concerning Ministerial Direction 65 and the exercise of discretion under section 501 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The Tribunal affirmed that Ministerial Direction 65 provides guidance but does not alter the law or limit the matters that can be considered. The exercise of the revocation discretion requires an evaluative assessment of all relevant matters to achieve a fair, rational, and legally reasonable outcome. This involves an active intellectual engagement with considerations favouring and opposing revocation, aiming for the correct or preferable decision.

In applying these principles, the Tribunal weighed the seriousness of the applicant's criminal conduct and drug use against factors such as his care for a frail, elderly mother, the potential compromise of his medical treatment regime if removed, and the strength of his ties to Australia. On balance, the Tribunal found that there were sufficient "other reasons" to justify the revocation of the visa cancellation. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision revoking the cancellation of Mr Kostopoulos' visa.