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

The applicant, a citizen of New Zealand who arrived in Australia as a child, sought review of a delegate's decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his Subclass 444 Special Category visa. The visa had been cancelled under section 501(3A) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) because the applicant did not pass the character test due to a substantial criminal record, including convictions for conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery armed with an offensive weapon, for which he received a 12-year prison sentence. The applicant had previously received a warning in 2009 that further offences would weigh heavily against him if his case was reconsidered.

The sole legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was "another reason" to revoke the visa cancellation decision under section 501CA(4) of the Act, given that the applicant did not pass the character test. In determining this, the Tribunal was required to consider the factors outlined in Direction No. 90, including the protection of the Australian community, the extent of impediments to removal, the impact on victims, and the applicant's links to the Australian community.

The Tribunal acknowledged the extreme seriousness and violence of the applicant's criminal conduct, noting the significant psychological impact on victims and the applicant's flagrant disregard for government authority, particularly in committing a serious offence shortly after receiving a warning. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's submissions regarding abuse suffered in youth detention and subsequent drug use, but ultimately found that these factors did not sufficiently mitigate the severity of his offending. However, the Tribunal found that the applicant had demonstrated a commitment to rehabilitation and had strong ties to his family in Australia, who had supported him throughout his difficulties.

The Tribunal decided to set aside the delegate's decision. In substitution, it was determined that the cancellation of the applicant's visa should be revoked, allowing him the opportunity to re-establish himself positively in Australia, with full awareness of the consequences of failing to do so.