Federal Court. Does FYBR set out a 3-staged process the decision maker must follow in every case in the context of the expectations of the Australian community?
At  in FYBR v Minister for Home Affairs  FCAFC 185; (2019) 272 FCR 454 (FYBR), Stewart J said the following about Direction 65, which was relevantly analogous to Direction 79:
To summarise, as expressed in Direction 65, the Australian community has only three relevant expectations:
• non-citizens will obey Australian laws when in Australia;
• it may be appropriate to refuse a visa application where a non-citizen has breached, or where there is an unacceptable risk that they will breach, the expectation that they will obey the law or where they have been convicted of offences in Australia or elsewhere;
• in a particular case, the refusal of a visa may be appropriate simply because the nature of the character concerns or offences is such that they should not be granted a visa.
The Federal Court answered that question as follows:
The remainder of this article is only available to Case Law and Platinum subscribers.
Read our Terms & Conditions and upgrade below:
Where GST applies, the above amounts are inclusive of GST.
Basic Content includes basic news, some media articles and selected announcements.
Premium Content includes all our content, except for Case Law Content. In other words, it includes Basic Content, plus all our articles on legislative and policy changes, industry updates and the Migration Legislation Tracker.
Case Law Content includes Basic Content, plus case law summaries, analysis and extract, but does not include Premium Content.
Platinum Content includes Basic Content, plus Premium Content, plus Case Law Content. In other words, it includes ALL our content.
If you already have a Case Law or Platinum subscription, click on 'Login' below.