LHNC and Minister for Home Affairs (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by LHNC (the Applicant) challenging a decision by the Minister for Home Affairs to affirm the mandatory cancellation of his Class TY Subclass 444 Special Category (Temporary) visa. The Applicant did not pass the character test, leading to the mandatory cancellation of his visa. The core of the dispute was whether there was "another reason" to revoke this cancellation, as contemplated by the relevant migration legislation and Ministerial Directions.

The court was required to determine whether the Applicant had established "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa, considering the principles outlined in Ministerial Direction No. 79. This involved assessing the nature and seriousness of the Applicant's past conduct and the risk to the Australian community should he re-offend. The court specifically had to weigh the Government's commitment to protecting the Australian community against any mitigating factors presented by the Applicant.

In reaching its decision, the court applied the principles set out in Primary Consideration A of Ministerial Direction No. 79, which mandates consideration of the protection of the Australian community from harm. The court noted that remaining in Australia is a privilege for non-citizens, contingent on them being law-abiding and not causing harm. The Applicant's criminal history, which commenced as a juvenile at age 14 and spanned from 2012 to 2017, involved multiple instances of robbery, including armed robbery and robbery in company, often targeting taxi drivers. The court found that the nature and seriousness of this conduct, coupled with the risk of future offending, weighed heavily against revoking the visa cancellation. Consequently, the court concluded that it could not exercise the discretion to revoke the cancellation. The decision under review was affirmed.