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

This matter concerned an application by the Applicant, Mr Yildiz, to revoke a mandatory visa cancellation decision made by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. The Applicant held a Class BS Subclass 801 Spouse visa and the cancellation was based on his failure to pass the character test due to serious criminal convictions, including aggravated sexual assault and inflicting actual bodily harm. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether there was "another reason" why the mandatory visa cancellation decision should be revoked.

The Tribunal was tasked with considering the factors outlined in Part C of Direction No. 79, particularly the primary consideration of protecting the Australian community. This involved assessing the nature and seriousness of the Applicant's conduct to date, as well as the risk to the community should he re-offend. The Tribunal was also directed to consider other relevant factors, including the best interests of the Applicant's minor child, the expectations of the Australian community, the strength and duration of the Applicant's ties to Australia, the impact on Australian business interests, the impact on victims, and the extent of impediments to his removal from Australia.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal found the Applicant's criminal conduct to be very serious, noting convictions for violent and sexual offences against women between 2013 and 2016. The Tribunal specifically highlighted the aggravated sexual assault conviction, which involved luring a victim into a laneway, acting violently, and causing significant physical injuries. The Tribunal also considered the Applicant's history of drug and alcohol misuse, his limited remorse and acceptance of responsibility, and the moderate to high risk of re-offending. After weighing all the relevant considerations, the Tribunal concluded that the Applicant had not established "another reason" for the mandatory visa cancellation decision to be revoked.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the mandatory visa cancellation decision.