Romanov v Minister for Home Affairs

The case of Romanov v Minister for Home Affairs involved the applicant, Romanov, who sought judicial review of a decision by the Tribunal not to revoke a mandatory cancellation of his Class BC Subclass 100 Spouse Visa. Romanov, a 43-year-old from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, was living in Australia with his Australian-Macedonian wife and their two children. Despite being a loving father, Romanov had a substantial criminal record, including multiple sentences for various offences. Romanov’s visa was cancelled on character grounds in 2013, but this decision was set aside by the Tribunal. Romanov was warned in 2014 that his visa could be cancelled if he continued to offend, and subsequently, he committed more offences leading to a notice of visa cancellation on 24 March 2017. Romanov applied to have this decision revoked on 6 April 2017, but the Tribunal affirmed the decision on 18 April 2018.

The legal issues before the court involved whether the Tribunal erred in its consideration of the evidence and whether the decision was legally unreasonable or arbitrary. Romanov argued that the Tribunal failed to properly consider the evidence, particularly regarding the impact on his children and procedural fairness. He also claimed that the Tribunal's decision was legally unreasonable because it did not adequately consider the subjective circumstances and the potential hardship of returning to Macedonia. Romanov further contended that the Tribunal did not sufficiently weigh the relevant considerations under the Minister’s Direction No. 65.

The court found that the Tribunal had carefully considered all the relevant material and concluded that the decision should be affirmed. The Tribunal's reasons for this conclusion were clear and cogent. The court held that Romanov's submission regarding procedural fairness and the reliance on previous decisions was misconceived. The Tribunal was entitled to consider all circumstances, and Romanov's criminal conduct post-2013 was significant. The court could not identify any jurisdictional error in the Tribunal's decision, leading to the conclusion that the application for judicial review must be dismissed.

The court dismissed Romanov's application and ordered that Romanov pay the Minister's costs of the application as agreed or taxed.