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

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Pavey and the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. The dispute concerned the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa due to his failure to pass the character test. The applicant sought to have this cancellation revoked, arguing that there were other reasons why the visa should not have been cancelled.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the mandatory visa cancellation should be revoked, applying Ministerial Direction No. 90. This involved assessing various considerations, including the nature and seriousness of the applicant's offending conduct, the risk of reoffending, the protection of the Australian community, the best interests of his minor children, his links to the Australian community, and any impediments to his removal. The applicant had a significant criminal history, including drug offences and family violence, but had resided in Australia for most of his life and had four minor children.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant's criminal history and conduct weighed heavily against revocation, other factors favoured his case. These included his long ties to Australia, having arrived as a child, the potential negative impact on his elderly mother if he were deported, and the expert opinion suggesting diminished rehabilitation prospects if returned to the UK. The Tribunal also considered the best interests of his minor children, noting that despite limited past involvement, it was in their interests to have a meaningful relationship with their father. Balancing these competing considerations, the Tribunal found that the totality of the evidence and the principles outlined in Direction 90 weighed slightly in favour of the applicant.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision to refuse to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation. In substitution, the Tribunal decided to revoke the cancellation of the applicant's visa.