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

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa. The applicant, a 35-year-old man who arrived in Australia at age 17, had his visa cancelled due to a substantial criminal record, which included traffic and drug convictions, as well as aggravated assault against a former partner. The central dispute concerned whether there was "another reason" to revoke the cancellation decision, as required by section 501CA(4) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), considering the primary and other considerations outlined in Direction No 79.

The Tribunal was required to determine two key issues: first, whether the applicant passed the character test as defined by section 501(6) of the *Migration Act*; and second, if he did not pass the character test, whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation. In addressing the second issue, the Tribunal had to consider the primary considerations outlined in Direction No 79, including the protection of the Australian community, the nature and seriousness of the offending, the risk to the community, the best interests of any minor child, the expectations of the Australian community, and the strength, nature, and duration of the applicant's ties to Australia, as well as any impediments to his return to New Zealand.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the application of Direction No 79. It found that while the protection of the Australian community weighed against revocation, the best interests of the applicant's six-year-old son were a significant factor favouring revocation. The Tribunal noted the parental relationship, despite the applicant's separation from the child's mother shortly after birth and differing accounts of contact. The Tribunal ultimately found that there was another reason why the decision to cancel the applicant's visa should be revoked. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision and substituted it with a decision to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa.