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

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mr Strickland, a New Zealand citizen whose visa was mandatorily cancelled under section 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) due to failing the character test, stemming from a conviction for grievous bodily harm. The core dispute before the Tribunal was whether there was "another reason" why the mandatory visa cancellation should be revoked, as permitted by section 501CA(4)(b)(ii) of the Act.

The Tribunal was required to determine if Mr Strickland had established another reason to revoke the visa cancellation, having already accepted that he failed the character test. In undertaking this task, the Tribunal was mandated to comply with Ministerial Direction No. 99, which provides guidance on the considerations to be applied when assessing whether to revoke a mandatory visa cancellation. This involved a holistic assessment of primary and other considerations, including the protection of the Australian community from criminal conduct and the best interests of any children affected.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on a comprehensive and integrated view of the evidence and submissions presented. It considered the nature and seriousness of Mr Strickland's conduct, as outlined in paragraph 8.1.1(1) of Direction 99, and weighed this against other relevant factors. The Tribunal found that Mr Strickland's demeanour and testimony demonstrated reflection and a degree of perception regarding his past actions. Evidence from his former wife and a witness to the index offence provided context and corroborated his account. Ultimately, the Tribunal was satisfied that these factors, viewed holistically, constituted another reason to revoke the visa cancellation.

Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision not to revoke the visa cancellation and substituted a decision revoking the original visa cancellation.