When a resident return visa decision is refused or cancelled, the applicant can ask the tribunal to review it. Our pipeline holds 114 such decisions (2024 to 2026), covering the visa that lets permanent residents re-enter Australia. Here is what actually happened in them, straight from the published record.
These figures describe decisions that have already been made. Every case turns on its own facts and evidence, so they are a picture of the past, not a prediction. This is general information, not migration advice.
How to read these decisions
The Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) reviews decisions made by the Department of Home Affairs. Until 14 October 2024 it was called the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). When someone is refused a visa or has one cancelled, they can often ask the tribunal to look at the decision again.
- Upheld / Affirmed
- The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stands (the applicant lost).
- Set aside
- The tribunal disagreed with the original decision and replaced it (the applicant won).
- Remitted
- The case was sent back to Home Affairs to decide again, with directions (a fresh chance for the applicant).
- Overturned
- The original decision was reversed. On these pages we group overturned decisions under "Set aside" above.
Citations follow a simple pattern: [2026] ARTA 315 means decision number 315 of the tribunal in 2026. Older decisions use AAT in place of ARTA.
What the tribunal decided
Across these 114 decisions, the tribunal confirmed the original decision 51% of the time, set it aside 47% of the time, and remitted it for reconsideration 2% of the time.
| Outcome | Decisions | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Set aside | 54 | 47.4% |
| Upheld | 52 | 45.6% |
| Affirmed | 6 | 5.3% |
| Remitted | 2 | 1.8% |
Counts from 114 decisions captured by our pipeline, as at 2026-06-28. Outcome is the result recorded in each decision.
Decisions by year
How many decisions our pipeline holds for each year, and how often the original decision was set aside that year.
| Year | Decisions | Set aside |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 26 | 50% |
| 2025 | 48 | 40% |
| 2024 | 40 | 55% |
Most-cited legislation and rules
The provisions of the Migration Act and Regulations cited most often across the 12 decisions on this topic that record their citations. The number is how many of those decisions cite it.
Recent decisions
The 40 most recent decisions on this topic. Select a decision to read the full stored case story: the situation, the question before the tribunal, and what the tribunal established, straight from the record.
[2026] ARTA 10732026-06-18AffirmedThe applicant's criminal conduct, including domestic violence and assault, raised serious character concerns.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a 40-year-old Irish citizen, had his Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return Visa cancelled due to failing the character test.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant's criminal conduct, including domestic violence and assault, raised serious character concerns.
What the tribunal established
A non-citizen who fails the character test may have their visa cancelled if the decision-maker exercises their discretion to do so.
[2026] ARTA 10642026-06-16Set asideThe applicant sought review of the decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958.
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a 26-year-old Nepalese citizen, had his visa cancelled due to a substantial criminal record, including convictions for sexual intercourse with a child.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant sought review of the decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal must consider whether there is another reason to revoke the decision to cancel the applicant's visa, taking into account the primary and other considerations in Direction 110.
[2026] ARTA 10022026-06-05AffirmedWhether, under s 501CA(4)(b)(ii) and Direction 110, there is another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the visa.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
A long‑term UK citizen who arrived in Australia as a child has been convicted of large‑scale methamphetamine, cocaine and MDMA trafficking and had his Subclass 155 Resident Return Visa mandatorily cancelled.
The question before the tribunal
Whether, under s 501CA(4)(b)(ii) and Direction 110, there is another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the visa.
What the tribunal established
Under s 501CA(4) the Minister may revoke a mandatory cancellation only if the person passes the character test or the Minister is satisfied there is another reason to revoke, applying the primary and other considerations set out in Direction 110.
[2026] ARTA 8292026-05-18Set asideWhether the mandatory cancellation should be revoked despite the applicant failing the character test.
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
A Vietnamese citizen holding a Subclass 155 Resident Return visa had the visa cancelled under s 501(3A) after drug‑related convictions.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the mandatory cancellation should be revoked despite the applicant failing the character test.
What the tribunal established
Under s 501CA(4) a visa cancellation may be revoked if the person passes the character test or if there is another reason to do so, even when the character test is failed.
[2026] ARTA 8302026-05-15AffirmedThe Applicant sought revocation of the mandatory cancellation decision under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The Applicant, a 37-year-old Chinese citizen, had his visa mandatorily cancelled after being convicted of money laundering offences.
The question before the tribunal
The Applicant sought revocation of the mandatory cancellation decision under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958.
What the tribunal established
Australia has a sovereign right to determine whether non-citizens of character concern are allowed to enter or remain in Australia.
[2026] ARTA 7642026-05-08AffirmedWhether, despite failing the character test, there is “another reason” under s 501CA(4)(b)(ii) to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the visa.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
UK citizen residing in Australia since 2003, convicted of multiple domestic‑violence offences and serving a 12‑month sentence, leading to mandatory cancellation of his Subclass 155 Resident Return visa.
The question before the tribunal
Whether, despite failing the character test, there is “another reason” under s 501CA(4)(b)(ii) to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the visa.
What the tribunal established
A decision‑maker must apply s 501CA(4) and, in line with Ministerial Direction 110, weigh the primary and other considerations and may only revoke a mandatory cancellation if another reason outweighs the character concerns.
[2026] ARTA 7472026-05-07Set asideWhether the cancellation should be revoked under s 501CA(4) despite the applicant failing the character test.
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
An Iraqi citizen serving a 15‑year prison term for large drug offences had his Subclass 155 Resident Return Visa cancelled under the character test.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the cancellation should be revoked under s 501CA(4) despite the applicant failing the character test.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal must balance the primary considerations in Direction 110 and may revoke a cancellation if, notwithstanding a failed character test, another statutory reason justifies revocation.
[2026] ARTA 7632026-05-06AffirmedWhether the applicant fails the character test and the discretion under s 501(2) should be exercised to cancel his visa.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a holder of a Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa, was convicted of sexual offences against a child.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant fails the character test and the discretion under s 501(2) should be exercised to cancel his visa.
What the tribunal established
Under s 501(2) and Direction 110, the primary consideration is protection of the Australian community, and a finding that the applicant does not pass the character test requires cancellation of the visa.
[2026] ARTA 7392026-05-05Set asideThe applicant's conviction for a sexually based offence involving a child led to the cancellation of his visa, and he sought review of the decision.
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a 41-year-old Chinese citizen, had his Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa cancelled due to a conviction for possessing child abuse material.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant's conviction for a sexually based offence involving a child led to the cancellation of his visa, and he sought review of the decision.
What the tribunal established
The safety of the Australian community is the highest priority of the Australian Government.
[2026] ARTA 7422026-04-29Set asideWhether the applicant passes the character test and whether any other reason exists to revoke the mandatory cancellation.
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
A Chinese national holding a Class BB Resident Return visa had it mandatorily cancelled after a substantial criminal record for wildlife export offences.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant passes the character test and whether any other reason exists to revoke the mandatory cancellation.
What the tribunal established
Under s 501CA(4) the Minister may revoke a mandatory cancellation if the person passes the character test or if another reason justifies revocation.
[2026] ARTA 6242026-04-20AffirmedWhether the mandatory cancellation under s 501(3A) should be revoked in light of Direction 110 and other considerations.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
A 37‑year‑old Pakistani national, former refugee, had his Class BB Subclass 155 Resident Return Visa mandatorily cancelled after a conviction for possession of child exploitation material.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the mandatory cancellation under s 501(3A) should be revoked in light of Direction 110 and other considerations.
What the tribunal established
A visa may be mandatorily cancelled under s 501(3A) where the holder fails the character test and no other statutory reason exists to set aside the cancellation, even when Direction 110 is considered.
[2026] ARTA 5312026-03-31UpheldThe central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test under s501(2) of the Migration Act 1958, specifically considering s501(7)(f) regarding a…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant sought review of the decision to cancel his Class C BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa. The visa was cancelled because the applicant did not pass the character test.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test under s501(2) of the Migration Act 1958, specifically considering s501(7)(f) regarding a substantial criminal record.
What the tribunal established
A visa may be cancelled under s501(2) of the Migration Act if the Minister reasonably suspects the person does not pass the character test, and the person does not satisfy the Minister that they do.
[2026] ARTA 4032026-03-20Set asideThe central issue was whether the discretion to cancel the visa under s 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958 should be exercised, considering the character test and…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, an Indian national, sought review of a decision to cancel his Class BB subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa, which he was granted in July 2024. He had a conviction for possessing child pornography from January 2016.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the discretion to cancel the visa under s 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958 should be exercised, considering the character test and Direction 110.
What the tribunal established
When considering visa cancellation under s 501 of the Migration Act, the Tribunal must weigh the considerations in Direction 110 to determine whether the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised.
[2026] ARTA 3392026-03-11Set asideThe central issue was whether the delegate of the Minister was correct in refusing to revoke the cancellation of the applicant’s visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant's Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa was mandatorily cancelled under s 501(3A) of the Act because he did not pass the character test.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the delegate of the Minister was correct in refusing to revoke the cancellation of the applicant’s visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958.
What the tribunal established
When considering revocation of a visa cancellation under s 501CA(4), the Tribunal must consider all relevant matters, including the strength of the applicant's ties to Australia and the potential impact on the Australian community.
[2026] ARTA 2942026-03-04UpheldThe central issue was whether the Minister's delegate correctly decided not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa under section 501CA(4) of the…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a Malaysian citizen, had his Class BB (Subclass 155) Resident Return visa mandatorily cancelled under s 501(3A) of the Migration Act due to a substantial criminal record and imprisonment.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the Minister's delegate correctly decided not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa under section 501CA(4) of the Migration Act, considering the character test.
What the tribunal established
When assessing whether to revoke a visa cancellation under s 501CA, the Tribunal must weigh all relevant considerations, giving greater weight to the primary considerations outlined in Ministerial Direction 110.
[2026] ARTA 3942026-03-04UpheldThe central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation under s 501CA of the Migration Act 1958, considering the applicant's…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a stateless person born in Kuwait, had his Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa cancelled due to multiple convictions, including violent and drug-related offenses, and served several terms of imprisonment.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation under s 501CA of the Migration Act 1958, considering the applicant's criminal history and mental health conditions.
What the tribunal established
When considering visa cancellation under s 501CA, the Tribunal must consider all relevant matters, including the applicant's character, criminal history, and any relevant Ministerial Directions.
[2026] ARTA 4522026-03-03Set asideThe central issue was whether there was 'another reason' under s 501CA(4)(b)(ii) of the Migration Act to revoke the mandatory cancellation of Mr. Billy's visa, given his…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, Mr. Billy, held a Class BB Subclass 155 Resident Return visa, which was mandatorily cancelled under s 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958 following his conviction for a serious domestic-violence assault.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there was 'another reason' under s 501CA(4)(b)(ii) of the Migration Act to revoke the mandatory cancellation of Mr. Billy's visa, given his criminal conduct and HIV-positive status.
What the tribunal established
When considering the revocation of a visa cancellation under s 501CA of the Migration Act, the Tribunal must weigh all relevant factors, including the applicant's character and any compelling circumstances, to determine if there is 'another reason' to revoke the cancellation.
[2026] ARTA 6972026-02-24Set asideThe applicant's visa was cancelled under s 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958, and the applicant sought review of this decision.
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a 44-year-old citizen of Myanmar, had his Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa cancelled due to a conviction for committing an act of gross indecency against a child.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant's visa was cancelled under s 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958, and the applicant sought review of this decision.
What the tribunal established
The Minister has the discretion to cancel a visa under s 501(2) if the person does not pass the character test.
[2026] ARTA 2242026-02-19Set asideThe central issue was whether there was another reason to revoke the cancellation of the applicant’s visa, despite failing the character test under s 501CA(4) of the…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant sought review of a decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of their Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa. The applicant did not pass the character test under s 501(6)(a) of the Migration Act.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there was another reason to revoke the cancellation of the applicant’s visa, despite failing the character test under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958.
What the tribunal established
When considering the revocation of a visa cancellation under s 501CA(4), the Tribunal must consider all relevant factors, including the protection of the Australian community, the applicant's ties to Australia, and the best interests of any minor children.
[2026] ARTA 2532026-02-17UpheldThe central issue was whether the original visa cancellation should be revoked under section 501CA(4) of the Migration Act, considering Ministerial Direction No. 110.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant sought review of a decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of their Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa. The visa was cancelled because the applicant did not pass the character test due to a substantial criminal record.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the original visa cancellation should be revoked under section 501CA(4) of the Migration Act, considering Ministerial Direction No. 110.
What the tribunal established
When considering revocation of a visa cancellation under s501CA(4), the Tribunal must consider the relevant Ministerial Direction.
[2026] ARTA 2992026-02-16UpheldThe central issue was whether the delegate correctly exercised the discretion to cancel the applicant's visa based on the character test under section 501(2) of the…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a citizen of the Solomon Islands, sought review of a decision to cancel their Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa. The delegate of the Minister made the decision under section 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the delegate correctly exercised the discretion to cancel the applicant's visa based on the character test under section 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958, considering the applicant's criminal history and risk to the Australian community.
What the tribunal established
When considering visa cancellation under section 501(2) of the Migration Act, the decision-maker must consider the primary and other considerations outlined in Ministerial Direction 110, including the risk to the Australian community.
[2026] ARTA 3692026-02-12UpheldThe central issue was whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the decision to cancel the applicant's visa under s 128 of the Migration Act 1958.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Mr. Martinez applied for review of a decision to cancel his Subclass 155 (Five Year Resident Return) visa. The applicant was offshore at the time of the visa cancellation.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the decision to cancel the applicant's visa under s 128 of the Migration Act 1958.
What the tribunal established
The Administrative Review Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to review a decision to cancel a visa under s 128 of the Migration Act 1958 when the visa holder is outside Australia.
[2026] ARTA 1332026-02-04Set asideThe central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering the character test and the protection of the…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant sought review of a decision not to revoke the cancellation of their Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa. The applicant's visa had been cancelled under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering the character test and the protection of the Australian community under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act.
What the tribunal established
When considering revocation of a visa cancellation under s 501CA(4), the Tribunal must consider all relevant matters, including the strength of the applicant's ties to Australia, the best interests of any minor children, and the expectations of the Australian community.
[2026] ARTA 1352026-02-04Set asideThe central issue was whether the original visa cancellation under section 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958 should be revoked, considering the applicant's criminal…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant sought review of the decision to cancel his Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa. The visa was cancelled because the applicant did not pass the character test.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the original visa cancellation under section 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958 should be revoked, considering the applicant's criminal record and the relevant Ministerial Direction.
What the tribunal established
When considering visa cancellation under section 501(2), the Tribunal must consider all relevant factors, including Ministerial Directions, to determine whether the cancellation should be revoked.
[2026] ARTA 472026-01-19Set asideThe central issue was whether the original visa cancellation should be revoked under section 501CA (4) of the Migration Act, considering the applicant's substantial…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant sought review of a decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of their Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa. The visa had been cancelled under section 501(3A) because the applicant did not pass the character test.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the original visa cancellation should be revoked under section 501CA (4) of the Migration Act, considering the applicant's substantial criminal record and the application of Ministerial Direction No. 110.
What the tribunal established
When considering revocation of a visa cancellation under section 501CA(4), the Tribunal must consider all relevant factors, including Ministerial Directions, to determine if there is another reason to revoke the cancellation.
[2026] ARTA 4062026-01-19UpheldThe central issue was whether there was 'another reason' to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering Ministerial Direction No. 110 and the…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a Belgian national, had his Class BB (Subclass 155) Five Year Resident Return Visa cancelled under s 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958 due to serious offending, specifically sexual offending against a child.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there was 'another reason' to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering Ministerial Direction No. 110 and the factors outlined in s 501 of the Migration Act.
What the tribunal established
When considering the revocation of a visa cancellation under s 501, the Tribunal must weigh the primary and other considerations outlined in Ministerial Direction No. 110 to determine if there is another reason to revoke the cancellation.
[2025] ARTA 27692025-12-24UpheldThe central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test, given their criminal record, and whether there were other reasons to revoke the visa cancellation…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a citizen of Fiji, held a Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return Visa. The Tribunal reviewed the decision to affirm the visa cancellation due to the applicant's extensive criminal history.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test, given their criminal record, and whether there were other reasons to revoke the visa cancellation under the Migration Act 1958.
What the tribunal established
When considering visa cancellation, the Tribunal must assess whether a person passes the character test, taking into account the nature and seriousness of any criminal history, and whether there are other reasons to revoke the cancellation.
[2025] ARTA 27342025-12-16Set asideThe central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test under s 501(2) of the Migration Act, which allows visa cancellation if the visa holder is suspected…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a Pakistani citizen, had his Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa cancelled under s 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunal reviewed the decision to cancel his visa.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test under s 501(2) of the Migration Act, which allows visa cancellation if the visa holder is suspected of not passing the character test.
What the tribunal established
When considering visa cancellation under s 501(2) of the Migration Act, the Tribunal must assess whether the visa holder meets the character test.
[2025] ARTA 27522025-12-08UpheldThe central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory cancellation decision, considering Ministerial Direction No. 110.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant held a Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa, which was subject to mandatory cancellation due to failing the character test.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory cancellation decision, considering Ministerial Direction No. 110.
What the tribunal established
When considering the non-revocation of a visa cancellation, the Tribunal must consider all relevant factors, including the protection of the Australian community and the strength of the applicant's ties to Australia, as per Ministerial Direction 110.
[2025] ARTA 26832025-12-05Set asideThe central issue was whether the Minister was correct to cancel the applicant's visa under s501(2) of the Migration Act 1958, given the applicant's criminal history and…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant held a Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa, which was cancelled because he did not pass the character test under s501(2) of the Migration Act 1958.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the Minister was correct to cancel the applicant's visa under s501(2) of the Migration Act 1958, given the applicant's criminal history and mental health.
What the tribunal established
When considering visa cancellation under s501(2) of the Migration Act, the Tribunal must consider the best interests of any minor children and the strength, nature, and duration of the applicant's ties to Australia.
[2025] ARTA 25182025-11-25UpheldThe central issue was whether there was another reason to revoke the cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering the protection of the Australian community and the…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant sought review of a decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of her Class BB, Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa. The cancellation was due to the applicant failing the character test under s 501 of the Migration Act.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there was another reason to revoke the cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering the protection of the Australian community and the best interests of minor children, as per Direction No 110.
What the tribunal established
When considering revocation of a visa cancellation under s 501, the Tribunal must weigh the protection of the Australian community and the expectations of the Australian community against other factors, such as the best interests of minor children and the consequences of removal.
[2025] ARTA 26412025-11-24UpheldThe central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958, given…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a 49-year-old Indonesian citizen, sought review of a decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of their Class BB (subclass 155) Five Year Resident Return visa.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958, given they did not pass the character test.
What the tribunal established
When considering the revocation of a mandatory visa cancellation under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958, the Tribunal must consider all relevant matters, including the public interest and the circumstances of the individual.
[2025] ARTA 24632025-11-18Set asideThe central issue was whether the applicant met the character test, and if not, whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of their visa under…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a citizen of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, held a Class BB (Subclass 155) Five Year Resident Return Visa. The Tribunal considered whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant’s visa due to their criminal record and failing the character test.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the applicant met the character test, and if not, whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of their visa under the Migration Act 1958.
What the tribunal established
When considering visa cancellation, the Tribunal must consider all relevant factors, including Ministerial Directions, to determine if there are other reasons to revoke the cancellation.
[2025] ARTA 23602025-11-05UpheldThe central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test under s 501(6) of the Migration Act, and if not, whether the Tribunal should exercise discretion to…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a Uruguayan national, had his Class BB Subclass 155 Return (Residence) visa cancelled under s 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958 due to failing the character test.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test under s 501(6) of the Migration Act, and if not, whether the Tribunal should exercise discretion to not cancel the visa.
What the tribunal established
When considering visa cancellation under s 501 of the Migration Act, the Tribunal must weigh the protection of the Australian community and its expectations against the applicant's ties to Australia and the consequences of the decision.
[2025] ARTA 22722025-10-27UpheldThe central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering the character test and Ministerial…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, who held a Class BB Subclass 155 visa, had the mandatory cancellation of their visa upheld after being convicted of a crime and failing the character test.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering the character test and Ministerial Direction No. 110.
What the tribunal established
When considering the revocation of a mandatory visa cancellation, the Tribunal must consider all relevant factors, including Ministerial Directions, to determine if there are any other reasons to revoke the cancellation.
[2025] ARTA 22882025-10-21Set asideThe central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test, and if not, whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a 22-year-old man from China, had his Class BB (Subclass 155) Resident Return visa mandatorily cancelled under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunal reviewed the decision not to revoke the cancellation.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the applicant passed the character test, and if not, whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958.
What the tribunal established
When considering revocation of a visa cancellation under s 501CA(4), the Tribunal must consider all relevant matters, including those outlined in Direction 110, to determine if there is another reason to revoke the cancellation.
[2025] ARTA 20762025-10-15UpheldThe central issue was whether the applicant met the residence requirements for Australian citizenship under s21(4) of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007, specifically…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a Sudanese citizen holding a Resident Return (Subclass 155) visa, applied for Australian citizenship by conferral while in the United Arab Emirates, requesting the spousal ministerial discretion.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the applicant met the residence requirements for Australian citizenship under s21(4) of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007, specifically whether the ministerial discretion should be exercised.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal affirmed that the spousal ministerial discretion should not be exercised if the applicant did not maintain a close and continuing association with Australia during their periods of absence.
[2025] ARTA 20802025-10-14Set asideThe central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering the character test and Ministerial…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant's Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa was mandatorily cancelled. The Tribunal reviewed the delegate's decision to not revoke the mandatory cancellation.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa, considering the character test and Ministerial Direction No. 110.
What the tribunal established
When considering the revocation of a mandatory visa cancellation, the Tribunal must consider all relevant factors in Ministerial Direction No. 110, including the protection of the Australian community and the applicant's ties to Australia.
[2025] ARTA 20592025-10-13Set asideThe central issue was whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa under s 501CA (4) of the Migration Act 1958…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a citizen of Fiji, had her Class BB, Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa mandatorily cancelled under s 501CA (4) of the Migration Act 1958.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether there was another reason to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa under s 501CA (4) of the Migration Act 1958, considering her criminal record and character.
What the tribunal established
When considering the revocation of a visa cancellation, the Tribunal must weigh the protection of the Australian community and expectations of the community against the applicant's ties to Australia, the best interests of minor children, and the impediments to removal.
[2025] ARTA 19082025-09-19Set asideThe central issue was whether the Minister's delegate correctly decided not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa under s 501CA(4) of the…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant's Class BB Subclass 155 Five Year Resident Return visa was cancelled under s 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958. The applicant applied for review of the decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation.
The question before the tribunal
The central issue was whether the Minister's delegate correctly decided not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal may dismiss an application for review if the applicant fails to appear at the hearing, especially when the applicant refuses to attend despite multiple opportunities.
Track visa decisions as they land
Our pipeline reads new tribunal decisions from the official record every week and folds them into the numbers on these pages. Subscribers get the important rule and outcome shifts in plain English. Free, unsubscribe anytime.
Where do you actually stand?
Tribunal outcomes show how the rules are applied, but your own position depends on your visa, your points and your evidence.