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

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant, Ms. Peek, against the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs' decision to refuse to revoke the mandatory cancellation of her visa. The visa cancellation was based on Ms. Peek failing to pass the character test due to her extensive criminal history. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was tasked with determining whether there was "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms. Peek had established "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation of her visa, as contemplated by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This required the Tribunal to consider the Ministerial Direction No. 99, which outlines the framework for such decisions. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess the nature and seriousness of Ms. Peek's conduct, the risk to the Australian community if she were to re-offend, and other relevant considerations, including the impact on victims and any impediments to her removal.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on applying the criteria set out in Ministerial Direction No. 99. It found that Ms. Peek's criminal history, which spanned approximately 13 years and involved 87 offences across 32 sentencing episodes, including custodial sentences, fines, and probation orders, was "very serious". The Tribunal also considered the risk of recidivism, noting the nature of her offending, which included drug offences, violence against law enforcement and the public, repeated breaches of court orders, and significant domestic violence. Despite acknowledging Ms. Peek's mental health issues, including schizoaffective disorder, and her personal circumstances, the Tribunal concluded that the factors favouring revocation were outweighed by the factors against it, particularly the protection of the Australian community.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse to revoke the mandatory cancellation of Ms. Peek's visa. It found that the evidence did not establish "another reason" to depart from the mandatory cancellation, and therefore, the visa remained cancelled.