Federal Court. Was cl 14.2(1)(b) of Direction 79 concerned with the effect of non-revocation, as opposed to revocation, of the cancellation of the non-citizen’s visa? Do cll 14.2 or cl 14.4(1) permit consideration only of the negative impacts on family members of removal of the non-citizen from Australia?
Some of the questions to the Federal Court (FCA) were as follows:
Question 1: Was cl 14.2(1)(b) of Direction 79 concerned with the effect of non-revocation, as opposed to revocation, of the cancellation of the non-citizen’s visa?
Question 2: In DKN20, the Full Court of the FCA found that there was "no scope" in cl 14.4 for the Tribunal to consider the impact on a family member victim. Did the Full Court reach that conclusion "because it regarded the impact on family members as a matter to be addressed under cl 14.2(1)(b)" or rather "because it considered that cl 14.4(1) does not permit consideration of the positive impacts on victims of a revocation of the cancellation"?
Question 3: Does cl 14.2 permit consideration only of the negative impacts on family members of removal of the non-citizen from Australia?
Question 4: Does cl 14.4(1) permit consideration only of the negative impacts on family members of removal of the non-citizen from Australia?
Question 5: Could there be some form of compartmentalisation of the impact of removal on the Applicant's mother, such as "some degree of impact on [a family member] for the purposes of cl 14.2(b), and some separate degree of impact on [that member] as a victim ... for the purposes of cl 14.4(1)"?
The FCA answered those questions as follows: