Introduction
Visa refusals based on character concerns can be among the most challenging cases to navigate. When our client approached us after her Working Holiday visa was refused under section 501(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Act), she was understandably devastated.
At Brightstone Legal, we recognise that this case required a detailed and strategic approach. We crafted a meticulous legal strategy and developed a compelling argument aimed at overturning the refusal. Our commitment to the case ultimately paid off – the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) ruled in our client’s favour, instructing the Department of Home Affairs (Department) to reassess her application with the directive that she meets the relevant character requirements.
This case highlights the significance of expert legal representation, robust advocacy and a comprehensive understanding of migration law. Here’s how we successfully navigated the complexities of the case to secure justice for our client.
The Journey Behind the Appeal: Case Background
Our client first arrived in Australia in 2019 on a Working Holiday visa. However, later that year, she was convicted of Common Assault (domestic violence-related) and Property Damage, resulting in a 12-month Community Correction Order and Fines.
Despite fully disclosing their criminal history, her second Working Holiday visa application was refused under section 501(1) of the Act on the grounds that she failed the character test. The Department assessed her conviction as an indicator of potential future risk, particularly due to the involvement of family violence.
What is Section 501: Character Requirements?
Under section 501(1) of the Act, the Minister may refuse to grant a visa if the applicant does not satisfy the Minister that they meet the character test. This provision gives the Minster discretion to assess whether an individual poses a potential risk to the Australian community, considering factors such as criminal history, involvement in serious offences or concerns about future behaviour.
For further insight into how the character test operates and its implications on visa applications, please refer to our previous article:
A Single Domestic Incident, a Two-Year Bond and a Critical Visa Decision: Will Discretion Be Granted?
Defying the Odds and Proving the Case for a Second Chance
The Minister contends that the factors supporting refusal of the visa outweigh those in favour of granting it. Below is a summary of the key arguments for the refusal, along with our conter arguments:
- The applicant was convicted of Common Assault (domestic violence-related) and Property Damage.
- Under section 501(6)(d)(i) of the Act, a person fails the character test if there is a risk they may engage in criminal conduct in Australia.
- Our Arguments: We demonstrated that the offence was an isolated incident in an otherwise clean record. The client had no prior or subsequent legal issues. We argued that one mistake should not define an individual, particularly when there is clear evidence of rehabilitation. The client took full responsibility for the incident, cooperated with authorities and successfully completed all legal obligations. Furthermore, the police report itself acknowledged that the offence was an emotional, alcohol-fuelled reaction, rather than a pattern of violent behaviour.
- The Minister argued that any risk of reoffending, no matter how low, is unacceptable.
- Our Arguments: We contextualised the event, emphasising that it was not premeditated but rather an emotional reaction to a moment of betrayal. The victim did not sustain injuries, and there was no ongoing threat after the incident. We also pointed out that Ministerial Direction No. 110 allows for the consideration of individual circumstances rather than imposing a blanket refusal for anyone with a family violence-related offence.
- The Minister argues that the community expects non-citizens with a history of family violence to be denied a visa.
- Our Arguments: Numerous character references attested to the applicant’s positive contributions and strong moral character. Ministerial Direction No. 110 recognises that the community can be more tolerant of individuals who have spent a significant amount of time in Australia and demonstrated rehabilitation.
- The applicant has no immediate family in Australia and her employment was entry-level, not significantly affecting Australian business interests.
- Our Arguments: we demonstrated that family connections are not the only measure of integration. The applicant has built a stable life in Australia, forming meaningful relationships through her work and active community involvement
- The applicant is young, healthy and has family support in Ireland, with no evidence of significant hardship upon returning.
- Our Arguments: While technically able to return, doing so would severely disrupt her career and personal life in Australia. The hardship she would experience is not just financial, but also emotional, as she has established deep personal and professional ties within the community.
Through our comprehensive and strategic defence, we successfully persuaded the Tribunal to rule in our client’s favour. As a result, the Tribunal directed the Department to reassess her application, affirming that she meets the character test. This case demonstrates that even in complex character-based refusals, a well-prepared appeal can lead to a positive outcome.
From Setback to Success: The Power of Redemption in Visa Appeals
When our client approached us following her visa refusal, we recognised that this was a case that demanded expert legal strategy, meticulous preparation, and a thorough understanding of migration law. The stakes were high, and our team at Brightstone Legal was committed to challenging the decision with precision and determination.
During the hearing, our legal team presented clear, compelling arguments, ensuring that every piece of evidence was thoroughly examined and properly considered. We anticipated and addressed every potential challenge, leaving no room for doubt about our client’s ability to meet the relevant character requirements. Ultimately, the ART ruled in our favour, overturning the refusal and instructing the Department to reassess the application with a clear finding that our client meets the character test.
This case exemplifies how expert legal representation can transform a challenging situation into a successful outcome. It was truly rewarding to make a meaningful difference in our client’s life. At Brightstone Legal, we don’t just fight for our clients – we strategically navigate the law to ensure justice prevails. If you are facing a visa refusal, our team has the knowledge, dedication and expertise to help you secure the best possible result.
Testimonial
Zeta
‘I recently went through an incredibly stressful period due to a visa refusal, and I cannot express enough how grateful I am for the support I received from Brightstone Migration, especially from Mei Guo. From the very beginning, Mei’s understanding of my situation was truly remarkable. She showed a level of empathy and professionalism that instantly put me at ease during such a difficult time. Mei’s knowledge and expertise were absolutely outstanding. Whenever I had questions or concerns, Mei was always quick to respond, offering not just answers but reassurance as well. Her communication throughout the entire process was amazing! Thanks to Mei and the team at Brightstone Migration, I am confident that I wouldn’t have had such a positive outcome if I had gone anywhere else. Her dedication to my case made all the difference, and I can wholeheartedly recommend her services to anyone needing immigration advice, especially those facing a potential visa refusal or cancellation. If you’re looking for an immigration lawyer who’s both knowledgeable and genuinely cares, Mei Guo is definitely the person to go to!’
Need to consult with us? Book an appointment today.
Our team will give you expert advice that has been specifically tailored to your case.
Related news
Shifting Immigration Landscape: How Ministerial Direction No. 111 Redefines Processing Priorities for International Students
2025 Major Changes to Australia’s 482 and 186 Visas: What Skilled Workers Need to Know!
Increase Skilled Visa Income Thresholds from 1 July 2025
Related Cases
Turning the Tide: Tribunal Overturns Visa Refusal, Unlocking New Opportunities for a Genuine Student
5 March 2025
A Single Domestic Incident, a Two-Year Bond and a Critical Visa Decision: Will Discretion Be Granted?
13 February 2025
Bridging The Gap: Bridging Visa B Granted on Day of Submission
18 September 2024
Third Time’s the Charm: Brightstone Secures Visa After Two Previous Refusals
18 September 2024
Domestic Violence: Passed character requirements/VACCU
31 August 2023
Visa granted to a dependent above 26 years old
17 August 2023How we will help
Free Assessment
Please call us or fill in the questionnaire here for a free initial assessment. After a simple communication, we will understand your concerns and visa requirements in detail, and then provide a timely and comprehensive professional consultation with tailor-made plans.
Consultation
Our consultations are typically 45-60 minutes long, which allows us to provide you with a detailed strategy to address the needs and concerns you raised with us during the initial call.
Our fee is $400 + GST for the full session. You can book in a consultation by calling us, emailing us or filling in the Contact Us form.
Developing and Managing a Strategy
During our consultation session, we will go through in more detail your background and circumstances to ensure that we can provide a tailored solution to your problems and making sure that you meet all the legal requirements. If we notice any potential issues, we will also immediately formulate a solution.
We’ll also balance time required, cost and difficulty and allow you choose the most appropriate strategy. We will then attend to all visa application matters on your behalf.