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

This matter concerned an application by the Applicant for review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, and Multicultural Affairs to cancel his visa. The Applicant, who had resided in Australia since infancy, had his visa mandatorily cancelled following convictions for serious offences, including intentionally causing injury, affray, and theft. While an initial appeal led to a Community Corrections Order, the cancellation decision was later retrospectively validated by legislative amendment, prompting a further review.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the Applicant passed the character test, specifically considering whether his past conduct or the risk of future criminal conduct warranted the cancellation of his visa. The Tribunal also had to assess the extent of any impediments the Applicant might face if removed from Australia to New Zealand, taking into account his age, health, and the availability of support.

The Tribunal reasoned that the Applicant's history of offending, particularly a violent and unprovoked attack, raised significant character concerns. It concluded that the totality of his conduct demonstrated a persistent breach of community expectations regarding the adherence to Australian laws, justifying the forfeiture of his privilege to remain in Australia. This conclusion was reached despite the Applicant's long residence in Australia and other invoked positive factors. Regarding impediments to re-establishment in New Zealand, the Tribunal found no evidence of substantial language or cultural barriers, and the Applicant stated he had no current health concerns. While the Applicant expressed concerns about practical and emotional support, his parents' intention to join him in New Zealand was no longer firm, and there was no evidence from his brother.

Ultimately, the Tribunal found that the Applicant did not pass the character test and affirmed the decision not to revoke the visa cancellation. The Tribunal determined that the weight of the character concerns substantially outweighed any other considerations, including potential impediments to re-establishment in New Zealand.