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

This matter concerned an appeal by the Applicant, Mr. Snowden, against the mandatory cancellation of his visa by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. The cancellation was based on Mr. Snowden failing to pass the character test. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was tasked with determining whether there was another reason why the visa cancellation should be revoked, considering the principles outlined in Ministerial Direction 90.

The Tribunal was required to assess several factors under Ministerial Direction 90, including the protection of the Australian community, the nature and seriousness of the Applicant's offending conduct, the risk of reoffending, the expectations of the Australian community, impediments to removal, the impact on victims, and the strength, nature, and duration of the Applicant's ties to Australia. Specifically, the Tribunal had to weigh the Applicant's history of offences, including assaults and domestic violence, against evidence of his acquired brain injury, mental health issues, and the potential impact of his removal on his children, who relied on him as a positive role model.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal acknowledged the seriousness and repetitive nature of the Applicant's offending conduct, particularly instances of assault and domestic violence. However, it also took into account evidence suggesting that many of these offences were linked to his acquired brain injury and that his risk of reoffending was assessed as low to medium, particularly if he abstained from alcohol and drugs. The Tribunal considered the significant support provided by the Applicant's family, including his father, mother, and sister, who offered accommodation, financial assistance, and emotional support, and highlighted the importance of his presence for his sons' development. The Tribunal also noted the Applicant's efforts towards rehabilitation and his acceptance of responsibility for his past behaviour.

Ultimately, the Tribunal decided to set aside the Minister's decision to cancel the Applicant's visa and, in substitution, revoked the cancellation.