Federal Court (Full Court). Can it be said that, in the content of determining whether there is another reason to revoke under s 501CA(4) the mandatory cancellation of a visa under s 501(3A), "the greater the degree of clarity in which a claim has been made and advanced for consideration, the greater may be the need for the Tribunal to consider the claim in clear terms"? Further, was Omar (first instance) wrongly decided?
The questions to the Full Court of the Federal Court (FCAFC) were as follows:
Question 1: Can it be said that, in the content of determining whether there is another reason to revoke under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) the mandatory cancellation of a visa under s 501(3A), "the greater the degree of clarity in which a claim has been made and advanced for consideration, the greater may be the need for the Tribunal to consider the claim in clear terms" and that, conversely, "the more obscure and less certain a claim is said to have been made, the less may be the need for the Tribunal to consider the claim"?
Question 2: Was Omar (first instance) wrongly decided?
The FCAFC answered those questions as follows: