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

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Minister's delegate to refuse to revoke the cancellation of the applicant's Resident Return (subclass 155) visa. The applicant, a Thai citizen who had resided in Australia since childhood, did not dispute that he failed the character test due to a substantial criminal record, including a conviction for supplying a commercial quantity of a prohibited drug. The proceedings were brought under section 501CA(4) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), which allows for the revocation of a visa cancellation if the Minister is satisfied that there is another reason why the original decision should be revoked.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was another reason to revoke the visa cancellation, requiring a genuine and full consideration of all relevant matters. In exercising its discretion under section 501CA(4), the Tribunal was bound by Ministerial Direction No. 90, which outlines the considerations to be taken into account. These included the primary consideration of protecting the Australian community from harm, the seriousness of the applicant's offending and the risk of future offending, the best interests of any minor children in Australia, and the expectations of the Australian community. Other considerations included the extent of impediments to removal, the impact on victims, and the strength, nature, and duration of the applicant's ties to Australia.

The Tribunal acknowledged the compelling positive factors in the applicant's favour, including his long ties to Australia, his family connections, and the significant cultural and social difficulties he would face if returned to Thailand, including the prospect of returning to drug use and facing severe penalties under Thai law. However, the Tribunal ultimately found that the seriousness of the applicant's past offending, particularly the commercial supply of drugs, and the real likelihood of future offending, including drug use and dealing to support a habit, outweighed these positive factors. The Tribunal concluded that the risk of future offending was a significant concern that tipped the balance against revocation.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the cancellation of the applicant's visa was upheld.