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

This matter concerned an application for review of a delegate of the Minister's decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the Applicant's visa. The Applicant, a 34-year-old woman who had arrived in Australia nearly eight years prior on a partner visa, had her visa cancelled under section 501(3A) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) due to a substantial criminal record, specifically convictions for two money laundering offences, and serving a full-time sentence of imprisonment. The Applicant sought revocation of this cancellation decision, which was refused by the delegate, leading to the present review before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary issues: first, whether the Applicant passed the character test as defined by section 501(6) of the *Migration Act*; and second, if she did not pass the character test, whether there was another reason why the visa cancellation decision should be revoked, pursuant to section 501CA(4) of the *Migration Act*. In considering these issues, the Tribunal was guided by Direction No 90, which outlines primary and other considerations relevant to such decisions, including the protection of the Australian community, the nature and seriousness of the conduct, the risk to the community, the existence of minor children outside Australia, community expectations, the extent of impediments to removal, and the strength, nature, and duration of ties to Australia.

The Tribunal found that while the Applicant did not pass the character test due to her substantial criminal record, there was another reason to revoke the cancellation decision. This conclusion was reached after considering various factors, including evidence of the Applicant being a victim of domestic violence, which was treated as a separate other consideration. The Tribunal also took into account the presence of minor children outside Australia as another distinct other consideration. After weighing all the evidence and submissions, the Tribunal determined that the cancellation decision should be revoked.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision not to revoke the cancellation and substituted it with a decision to revoke the cancellation of the Applicant's visa.