Thoms (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an appeal by Mr. Thoms against the cancellation of his Subclass 444 (Special Category) visa. The cancellation was based on the ground that Mr. Thoms' conduct, specifically his contravention of an Intervention Order and his extensive criminal history, posed a risk to the safety of the Australian community.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether to exercise its discretion to cancel Mr. Thoms' visa, given that the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(e) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) did not mandate cancellation. The Tribunal was required to consider various factors, including the applicant's reasons for travel and stay in Australia, his compliance with visa conditions, and the degree of hardship that cancellation might cause.

The Tribunal reasoned that while Mr. Thoms had established economic ties in Australia and expressed a preference for the warmer climate and employment opportunities, these did not constitute compelling reasons to remain. Despite his claims of having no social or economic ties in New Zealand, the Tribunal found no evidence that he would be unable to obtain employment there, particularly as he had previously worked as a carpet layer in New Zealand. The Tribunal concluded that the risk of reoffending was not insignificant, and therefore, the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel Mr. Thoms' Subclass 444 (Special Category) visa.