Manebona and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (Migration)

This matter concerned Mr. Manebona and the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, heard before Senior Member N. Manetta of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The dispute arose from the mandatory cancellation of Mr. Manebona's visa under section 501(3A) of the *Migration Act 1958* due to his failure to pass the character test, stemming from serious domestic violence offending against his former partner. Mr. Manebona sought to have this cancellation revoked.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of Mr. Manebona's visa, considering the provisions of Direction 110. This involved weighing the seriousness of the offending conduct against countervailing considerations, particularly the interests of Mr. Manebona's two minor children and the views of their mother, who, despite being the victim of the violence, supported his continued presence in Australia to assist in their care.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the protection of the Australian community is the highest priority and serious conduct like family violence warrants significant weight against revocation, a careful assessment of the individual circumstances was necessary. The Tribunal found that the interests of the minor children weighed heavily in favour of revocation. This was particularly so given that the children's mother was incarcerated, supported Mr. Manebona's role in their lives, and that Mr. Manebona could make a substantial contribution to their immediate needs and ongoing well-being, despite the children having witnessed his violence. The Tribunal also noted the stress on Mr. Manebona's mother and her husband in raising the children, with assistance from his sister.

Ultimately, the Tribunal decided to set aside the decision to cancel Mr. Manebona's visa and substituted a decision revoking the cancellation. The Tribunal concluded that, on the evidence before it, revoking the cancellation was the correct and preferable decision.