One of the issues that weighs heavily against revoking a cancellation decision (under Direction 90) is if there have been any instances of family violence. Mr Deng’s visa was cancelled on the the grounds that he assaulted his girlfriend, Ms S. The main issue (see Deng v Minister for Immigration [2022] FCAFC 115)  was whether an intimate partner should be considered a family member for the purposes of Direction 90.  Whilst “member of a person’s family” is not defined in Direction 90, s 5G of the Migration Act provides that certain persons, including a de facto partner, are taken to be members of a person’s family. Ms S and the appellant were not in a de facto relationship. The Tribunal considered Ms S to be a family member of the appellant, stating that she was the applicant’s intimate partner meaning his violence against her was an act of family violence.

The appeal was allowed as it was found that the Tribunal’s error in classifying Ms S as a family member was a material error. The outcome for the appellant would have been different had Ms S not been considered a family member, as the assault would not have been classified as family violence.

Creative commons acknowledgment for the photograph.

Share Button