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

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to cancel the Applicant's visa. The Applicant failed the character test due to a substantial criminal record, including a sentence of imprisonment of 12 months or more. The central dispute revolved around whether there was another reason why the visa cancellation should be revoked, a determination to be made in accordance with Ministerial Direction No. 99. The case was heard by K Raif SM.

The court was required to determine whether the Applicant's offending conduct, specifically an unprovoked assault occasioning actual bodily harm to a vulnerable child, constituted family violence and was to be viewed very seriously under Direction 99. Further, the court had to assess the risk of reoffending, the best interests of any minor children, the expectations of the Australian community, the strength and duration of the Applicant's ties to Australia, and any impediments to his removal. The ultimate question was whether these considerations, taken together, constituted another reason to revoke the visa cancellation.

The Tribunal considered the nature and seriousness of the Applicant's conduct, noting the unprovoked assault on a three-year-old child with a disability. This conduct was categorised as a crime of a violent nature against a child and family violence, which Direction 99 states are viewed very seriously. While the Applicant argued for revocation based on his ties to Australia, including having a young child and family residing there, and impediments to removal, the Tribunal found that these factors were outweighed by the seriousness of his offending and the need to protect the Australian community. The Tribunal concluded that there was no other reason why the original decision to cancel the visa should be revoked.