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

This matter concerned an application by Seau to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for revocation of a visa cancellation made under subsection 501(3A) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The applicant had a substantial criminal record and did not pass the character test. The central dispute was whether there was another reason why the visa cancellation should be revoked, notwithstanding these findings.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had established "another reason" for the revocation of his visa cancellation, as contemplated by subsection 501CA(4) of the *Migration Act*. This involved considering the primary considerations outlined in Direction 90, specifically the protection of the Australian community, and weighing them against other relevant factors, including the applicant's personal circumstances and the potential impact of his removal on his Australian partner and her child.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal considered the nature and seriousness of the applicant's past conduct, including offences of stealing, assault, malicious damage, and driving with a suspended licence. It also assessed the risk to the Australian community should the applicant reoffend. The Tribunal acknowledged the applicant's submissions regarding his remorse, rehabilitation efforts, and his genuine and ongoing relationship with his Australian partner, as well as the potential harm to her and her child if he were removed. However, the Tribunal found that the protection of the Australian community and community expectations weighed against revocation, and that these primary considerations were not outweighed by the other factors presented. The Tribunal affirmed the original decision to cancel the visa.