Maharjan (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mr. Maharjan, who sought to have the cancellation of his Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa affirmed. The dispute arose from Mr. Maharjan's criminal convictions for assault and domestic violence offences, which led to the Minister's decision to cancel his visa under section 116(1)(g) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and regulation 2.43(1)(oa) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(g) was established, and if so, whether the Minister's discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised in light of all relevant circumstances. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant's criminal convictions constituted a prescribed ground for cancellation and then assess whether the cancellation was appropriate, considering factors such as the purpose of the visa, compliance with conditions, and the degree of hardship.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's convictions for one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, two counts of common assault (domestic violence), three counts of stalking, intimidating, and intending to cause fear of physical harm (domestic violence), and one count of destroying or damaging property (domestic violence) were not in dispute. These convictions satisfied the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(g). In exercising its discretion, the Tribunal weighed the seriousness of the offences, noting that they involved violence and resulted in an apprehended domestic violence order. While acknowledging the applicant's claims of stress and his completion of an anger management course, the Tribunal found that the nature and circumstances of the offences outweighed other considerations, including the applicant's desire to study and work in Australia and the potential financial hardship to his family. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant's behaviour, including deflecting blame and excusing his conduct, and the police reports indicating a pattern of behaviour, were significant factors.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel Mr. Maharjan's Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) visa.