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

This matter concerned an application by the applicant, Mr Stowers, for review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs to cancel his Class TY Subclass 444 Special Category (Temporary) visa. The cancellation was based on the applicant not passing the character test, specifically due to having a substantial criminal record under section 501(7) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the discretion to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation under section 501CA of the Act should be exercised, or if there was "another reason" to revoke the decision.

The Tribunal considered several legal issues. Firstly, it had to assess whether the applicant could rely on the exception in section 501CA(4)(b)(i) of the Act, which relates to the best interests of minor children. Secondly, the Tribunal was required to determine if there was "another reason" to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation, taking into account the considerations outlined in Direction No 79. This involved weighing the protection and expectations of the Australian community against factors such as the strength, nature, and duration of the applicant's ties to Australia, and any impediments he might face if removed to New Zealand.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal noted the applicant's extensive criminal history, which commenced in 2007 and included violent assaults against two female partners, with 19 convictions recorded between 2008 and 2016. It also considered the applicant's difficult personal history, including childhood abuse and subsequent mental health issues. However, the Tribunal found that the applicant could not rely on the best interests of his minor children as a reason to revoke the cancellation, as this ground was not established. The Tribunal then turned to the question of "another reason," carefully considering the primary consideration of protecting the Australian community. It acknowledged the seriousness of violent crimes, particularly against women, and the cumulative effect of repeated offending.

Ultimately, the Tribunal determined that the applicant had not established grounds for the mandatory visa cancellation to be revoked. The decision under review was set aside.