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

This matter concerned an application by RRCX (the Applicant) to review a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (the Minister) to refuse to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa. The Applicant had failed to pass the character test due to his criminal history in Australia. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) was required to determine whether there was "another reason" why the mandatory cancellation decision should be revoked.

The Tribunal was tasked with considering the primary considerations outlined in Direction 90, including the protection of the Australian community, the best interests of minor children, and the expectations of the Australian community. It also had to weigh other considerations, such as any impediments to the Applicant's removal from Australia and his links to the Australian community. The Applicant arrived in Australia at the age of 11, had a history of employment, and had established his own business. However, he also had a criminal conviction for supplying prohibited drugs on an ongoing basis in 2004, when he was a minor.

The Tribunal found that there was "another reason" why the mandatory visa cancellation should be revoked. In reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal considered the Applicant's age at the time of the offence, his subsequent efforts to establish himself in Australia, and his links to the community. The Tribunal ultimately decided to set aside the Minister's decision.

The Tribunal ordered that the Reviewable Decision, which refused to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation, be set aside. In substitution, the cancellation of the Applicant's Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa was revoked.