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

This matter concerned an appeal against the refusal of a protection visa. The applicant had been convicted by final judgment of a particularly serious crime, and the central dispute was whether the applicant posed a danger to the Australian community, thereby disentitling them to a protection visa under section 36(1C) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The decision was made by Deputy President Boyle of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine whether the applicant was a danger to the Australian community, as contemplated by section 36(1C)(b) of the *Migration Act*. This required an assessment of the risk of reoffending, taking into account the applicant's past offending, their diagnosed mental health conditions including post-traumatic stress disorder and borderline personality disorder, and their engagement with treatment.

Deputy President Boyle applied the standard that "danger" in section 36(1C) means a "present and serious risk". The Tribunal found that the applicant had been convicted of a particularly serious crime and, crucially, concluded that if released into the Australian community, the applicant would pose a present and serious risk of reoffending. This conclusion was reached despite the applicant's engagement with treatment, indicating that the risk of reoffending was considered unacceptable.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the delegate of the Minister to refuse the applicant a protection visa under section 65 of the *Migration Act*, as the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in section 36(1C)(b).