S270/2019 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal concerning the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection's decision not to revoke the cancellation of the appellant's visa. The appellant's visa had been mandatorily cancelled under section 501(3A) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) due to a substantial criminal record and serving a sentence of imprisonment. The Minister subsequently declined to revoke this cancellation under section 501CA(4) of the Act.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Minister was obliged to consider Australia's non-refoulement obligations when exercising the power to revoke a visa cancellation under section 501CA(4), particularly in circumstances where the appellant had not made a claim to fear persecution or serious harm. The appellant argued that non-refoulement obligations were a mandatory relevant consideration in the Minister's decision-making process.

The Court reasoned that section 501CA(4) of the *Migration Act* does not mandate the consideration of non-refoulement obligations when deciding whether to revoke a visa cancellation, unless the visa in question is a protection visa or there is a clear indication or claim of non-refoulement. The Court noted that non-refoulement obligations are specifically addressed in other provisions of the Act relating to protection visas and removal. In this case, the appellant had not made any claim to fear persecution, nor had he applied for a protection visa. Therefore, the Court concluded that non-refoulement obligations were not a mandatory relevant consideration in the Minister's decision to refuse to revoke the cancellation of the appellant's visa.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.