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

This matter concerned an application by Mr Singh, an Indian citizen, for review of a delegate's decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa. Mr Singh's visa had been cancelled under section 501(3A) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) due to his substantial criminal record, which included over 200 offences and a recent sentence of 12 months imprisonment. He subsequently applied for revocation of the cancellation decision, but this was refused by the Minister's delegate. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was asked to review this refusal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was "another reason" why the mandatory visa cancellation decision should be revoked, as contemplated by section 501CA(4)(b)(ii) of the Act. This required the Tribunal to consider Mr Singh's representations holistically and determine if any substantial or significant claims made within them warranted the revocation of the visa cancellation. The Tribunal was required to stand in the shoes of the original decision-maker and consider the circumstances as they existed at the time of its own review.

The Tribunal applied the principles established in *Bettencourt v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs* and *Viane v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection*, which stipulate that a genuine and real consideration must be given to substantial and significant claims made in representations. Mr Singh's representations included concerns about his safety in India due to drug-affected individuals and his ex-wife's cousin, his fear of accidents given his father and brother's deaths in such incidents, and his desire to provide his daughter with a good education in Australia. However, after a comprehensive, holistic, and integrated review of these considerations alongside the gravity of his criminal history, the Tribunal was not satisfied that there was another reason to revoke the visa cancellation.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to revoke the cancellation of Mr Singh's visa.