The Court held that while the AAT failed to make an actual determination about whether visa cancellation was in the best interests of affected children (as required by Direction 90), this error was not material because the Tribunal's detailed analysis made it improbable the decision would have been different. The Court confirmed that tribunals must expressly or impliedly determine whether cancellation is or is not in children's best interests, not merely attribute weight to that consideration. The Court also held that the Tribunal's approach of attributing specific weights to each consideration before reaching an overall conclusion did not constitute improper 'formulaic' reasoning contrary to CRNL v Minister.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.