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

The applicant, Titoa, sought to challenge the non-revocation of a mandatory cancellation of his Class TY Subclass 444 Special Category visa. The cancellation was based on the applicant failing to pass the character test. The dispute before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerned whether there was another reason to revoke this mandatory cancellation decision, with the applicant arguing that his risk of reoffending was low.

The legal issues before the AAT were whether the applicant had demonstrated a low risk of reoffending, and if so, whether this, along with other considerations, constituted "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa. This required the AAT to consider the applicant's submissions regarding personal deterrence, remorse, community ties, and the impact on his family, in light of Ministerial Direction No. 90, which provides a framework for decision-making in such cases. The applicant contended that his efforts to abstain from drugs and negative associations, coupled with his remorse and desire to maintain positive relationships, indicated a low risk of recidivism.

The AAT's reasoning focused on applying the principles outlined in Ministerial Direction No. 90. While acknowledging the applicant's stated remorse and efforts towards personal deterrence, the AAT found that the applicant's criminal conduct, including a serious violent offence against a law enforcement officer and numerous property and traffic-related offences, was "very serious." The AAT noted the applicant's concession that the nature of harm if he were to reoffend would be "very serious" and likely result in significant psychological, financial, and physical harm. Despite the applicant's arguments about his low risk of reoffending and the potential hardship to his family if removed, the AAT ultimately concluded that the seriousness of his past conduct and the potential harm of future offending meant that the mandatory cancellation of his visa should be affirmed.