Thompson v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2004] FCA 139 (26 February 2004)

MIGRATION – cancellation of visa – character test – visa holder born in Trust Territory of New Guinea – son of an Australian father and New Guinean mother – no registration of Australian citizenship – no naturalisation after arrival in Australia – grant of permanent resident entry permit – deemed grant of transitional (permanent) visa after 1994 – cancellation of visa – whether applicant was Australian citizen at time of cancellation – whether British subject – whether stateless – whether citizen of Papua New Guinea – applicant citizen of Papua New Guinea – not alien for purposes of Australian Citizenship Act upon entry into Australia – now alien - cancellation of visa within power – application dismissed

Australian Citizenship Act 1948 (Cth) s 11, s 5
Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 501
Migration Reform Act 1992 (Cth)

Migration Reform (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 1994 reg 4

Constitution of Papua New Guinea s 65

Shaw v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2003] HCA 72; (2003) 203 ALR 143 cited
Cunliffe v Commonwealth of Australia [1994] HCA 44; (1994) 182 CLR 272 cited
Pochi v Macphee [1982] HCA 60; (1982) 151 CLR 101 cited
Re: Patterson; Ex parte Taylor [2001] HCA 51; (2001) 207 CLR 391 cited

JASON ANTHONY THOMPSON v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
W5 OF 2002

FRENCH J
26 FEBRUARY 2004
PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application is dismissed.

2. The applicant is to pay the respondent’s costs of the application.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

1 Jason Anthony Thompson came to Australia with his Australian father in 1975. He was born of an indigenous New Guinean woman in the Trust Territory of New Guinea in 1969. His birth was not registered and so he did not acquire Australian citizenship by descent. Following his arrival in Australia no application was made or pursued for Australian citizenship. He was given a Permanent Resident Entry Permit in 1985 which, by operation of law, became a Transitional (Permanent) Visa in 1994. Mr Thompson has committed serious criminal offences including the rape of, and unlawful and indecent dealing with, a ten-year-old girl in 1986 and child stealing, also involving a ten-year-old girl, in 1998. The Minister has cancelled his visa. Mr Thompson challenges that decision on various grounds.

2 Mr Thompson’s application was heard on 1 April 2003 but, after advice to the parties, judgment was deferred pending the decision of the High Court on the aliens power in Shaw v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2003] HCA 72; (2003) 203 ALR 143. That decision, given on 9 December 2003 was adverse to some of Mr Thompson’s contentions. For the reasons that follow, the balance of his application cannot succeed and will be dismissed with costs.

3 Jason Anthony Thompson was born in Lae on 9 April 1969, in what was the Trust Territory of New Guinea. His father, Brian Thompson, was born in Australia on 19 February 1931. He is and was at all material times an Australian citizen. Jason Thompson’s mother, Lynette Tokan, was born in New Guinea. She is and was at all material times a British subject. She and his father were married according to the traditional laws and customs of New Guinea on 15 March 1967. Mr Thompson and his father came to Australia, arriving at Brisbane airport on 22 August 1975. They were travelling on the father’s Australian passport. Later they travelled to Western Australia. In September 1977, according to records of the Department for Community Services (DCS) then known as the Department for Community Welfare, Mr Thompson’s father left him in the care of a Mrs Glerum in Guildford and did not see him again. In 1979 he was committed to the care of the Department for Community Welfare until he reached the age of 18.

4 In 1983, DCS made an inquiry about the records of his birth in New Guinea. On 15 December 1983, the Australian High Commission wrote to DCS advising that there was no record of the registration of his birth. The Commission noted, however, that many births, particularly those that took place in villages or outlying areas were not registered. Further inquiries were made in April 1984 with the PNG Consulate General. The Consulate General advised the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs in May 1984 that they had contacted Jason Thompson’s uncle, Mr Henry Tokan, who acknowledged that Jason was his sister’s son. His mother made a statutory declaration to that effect in December 1984 and also said in the declaration that she had married Regge (sic) Thompson on 15 March 1967. Mr Thompson received letters from his mother in July and October 1984 raising the possibility that he might visit her in PNG. In August 1984, an officer in the Citizenship Section of the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs gave telephone advice to DCS that Mr Thompson was an Australian citizen by birth on the basis that PNG was an Australian dependency at the time of his birth. An officer of DCS wrote to Mr Thompson’s mother in November 1984 indicating that that department would be applying for an Australian passport for her son.

5 On 21 August 1985, the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs issued Mr Thompson with a Permanent Entry Permit under which he was permitted to remain in Australia for residence. The Permit, however, would have no effect after he left Australia. Departmental records of this grant indicate that he had arrived in Australia on 22 August 1975. By virtue of the Migration Reform (Transitional) Provisions Regulations 1994 the Entry Permit continued from 1 September 1994 as a Transitional (Permanent) Visa which permits its holder to remain indefinitely in Australia.

6 DCS sent a citizenship application on Mr Thompson’s behalf to the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs on 9 September 1985. However he failed to attend for a scheduled interview at the Department on 3 October 1985 and again on 13 November 1985. A departmental file note indicates that no further interviews were to be arranged. As it turned out, he was at that time on remand in the Longmore Detention Centre pending the hearing of charges of rape, deprivation of liberty and indecent dealing against him.

7 Mr Thompson accumulated a substantial criminal record both as a juvenile and as an adult. The detailed content of that record is set out as an annexure to these reasons. On 30 May 1986, as appears from the criminal record, he was convicted, after trial, in the Supreme Court of Western Australia of the offences of breaking and entering and rape. He was also convicted at the same time, on his plea of guilty, of unlawful and indecent dealing. The victim of the rape and the unlawful and indecent dealing was a 10 year old girl. Late one night, while under the influence of alcohol, Mr Thompson entered a residence by pushing open a flywire door, went into the girl’s bedroom in the residence, picked her up and carried her out to a shed on the premises. It was there that the indecent dealing and the rape occurred. Neither the girl nor her family were known to him. In respect of each offence he was sentenced by Rowland J to be detained in strict custody until the governor’s pleasure be known and thereafter in safe custody in such place or places as the governor might from time to time direct. The order was made under the provisions of s 19(6a)(a) of the Criminal Code. At the time he was sentenced Mr Thompson was 17 years of age.

8 On 20 March 1998, Mr Thompson was sentenced, having been convicted after trial, for one count of burglary and one count of attempted child stealing. These offences occurred in the early hours of 9 October 1996. He went to the house of a ten year old girl and entered through a closed but unlocked rear door. He went to the girl’s bedroom, picked her up and carried her towards the rear of the house. She awoke in the hallway, realised it was not her father carrying her and screamed. He then put her down and fled. The sentencing judge observed that nothing in any report she had ordered nor in Mr Thompson’s antecedents held out any hope for his rehabilitation or reform. On the offence of burglary, he was sentenced to ten years imprisonment. For attempted child stealing he was sentenced to five years imprisonment. The sentences were to be served concurrently commencing from 15 August 1997, the date from which he had been in custody in relation to those offences. The sentencing judge made a further order that he be imprisoned indefinitely.

9 On 21 May 2001, an officer of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs sent a letter to Mr Thompson giving notice that the Minister intended to consider cancelling his visa under subs 501(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). He responded to that notice with a letter dated 29 May 2001 in which he claimed to be reformed. He sent a further letter on 7 June 2001 asserting that his father was an Australian citizen and that he himself was an Australian citizen by birth. He sought further time to enable his status as an Australian citizen to be verified.

10 In a letter dated 12 June 2001, an officer of the Cancellation Section of the Department wrote to Mr Thompson at Hakea Prison advising that until the age of five years he was eligible for Australian citizenship by birth had his father registered his birth with the Department. However his father had not done that. Moreover his birth had not been registered with the Registrar General’s office in PNG. The Angau Hospital in Lae in New Guinea, where he was born, had no record of the birth. His mother was not an Australian citizen and citizenship by descent was therefore not conferred. The letter referred to his application for Australian citizenship on 7 March 1985 and the departmental conclusion that he was not an Australian citizen at that time. It also mentioned his failure to attend interviews in relation to his application for citizenship. It pointed out that under s 10C of the Citizenship Act he was eligible to apply for Australian citizenship by descent. Section 10C has a character requirement which must be satisfied. There was other correspondence between Mr Thompson and the Department which it is not necessary to set out here.

11 The Minister received a submission from his department, dated 28 November 2001, relating to the cancellation of Mr Thompson’s visa under s 501(2) of the Migration Act. It was entitled Re Jason Anthony THOMPSON dob 09.04.1969 LIABILITY FOR CANCELLATION OF Jason Anthony THOMPSON’s VISA UNDER SECTION 501(2) OF THE MIGRATION ACT. The departmental paper sought the Minister’s decision on whether Mr Thompson passed the character test in s 501(6) of the Migration Act and, if not, whether his visa should be cancelled pursuant to s 501(2). In referring to the ‘Immigration History of Visa Holder’ it referred to the Visa Class as ‘permanent resident entry permit granted 21.08.1985’. It described the visa expiry date as ‘on departure from Australia’ and the Stay Period of the Visa as ‘indefinite’. As will appear from reference to the relevant regulations below, the deemed ‘transitional (temporary) visa’, which supplanted the Permanent Resident Entry Permit in 1994, conferred the same entitlements to remain in Australia as the Permanent Resident Entry Permit.

12 The paper to the Minister referred to the convictions and sentences imposed in May 1986 and March 1998. It also referred to other convictions in 1994, 1995 and 1997. It was put to the Minister that it was open to him to find on those facts that there was a reasonable suspicion that Mr Thompson did not pass the character test because he had been sentenced to a term of imprisonment for twelve months or more.

13 The paper set out factors relevant to the exercise of the Minister’s discretion including matters covered by a Ministerial Direction under s 499 of the Act which had issued to delegates and the AAT in relation to the exercise of their discretion under s 501. It was pointed out to the Minister that he was not personally bound by his s 499 Direction, but it was open to him to be guided by the factors set out in the direction. Various of those factors were then referred to. The seriousness of sexual assaults, kidnapping, crimes against children and other crimes involving violence or the threat of violence was one such factor.

14 The paper set out Mr Thompson’s full criminal record. It also reproduced extracts from the sentencing remarks of Rowland J and Yeats DCJ in 1986 and 1998 respectively. Mr Thompson’s more recent behaviour was discussed, including five separate occasions on which he was found guilty of internal charges within the prison system. It was said to be open to the Minister to find that he was at a high risk of recidivism. Issues of general deterrence and the ‘Expectations of the Australian Community’ were also addressed. It was pointed out that Mr Thompson has no children so the Convention on the Rights of the Child did not apply. Under the heading ‘Other Considerations’ reference was made to the fact that Mr Thompson’s father and aunt live in Australia. The Department had advice from his aunt that his father is now in an aged care home in Brisbane. His mother resides in PNG. It was pointed out he has been a permanent resident of Australia since 1985. It was submitted that Mr Thompson is not an Australian citizen. His formal application for Australian citizenship in 1985 and the non-completion of that process were recounted.

15 Under the heading ‘DECISION’ in Part E of the submission, the Minister endorsed his approval, on 5 December 2001, on the following paragraphs:

16 On 7 January 2002, Mr Thompson made application for judicial review of the Minister’s decision. The matter eventually came on for hearing on 1 April 2003. Judgment was reserved and, after advice to the parties, deferred until the High Court had delivered judgment in Shaw v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs. That judgment was delivered on 9 December 2003. No further submission has been received.

17 The original application was amended. The grounds of the amended application were as follows:

18 The relief sought is prohibition, certiorari and associated injunctive and declaratory relief.

19 There are two limbs to ground (a) of the application which asserts that in cancelling Mr Thompson’s visa and in proposing to take him into detention under the Migration Act for removal from Australia, the Minister acted unlawfully and beyond Commonwealth power. The first limb, reflected in particulars (i) to (xi), depends upon the proposition that Mr Thompson was, from and after his arrival in Australia on 22 August 1975, an Australian citizen.

20 The second proposition reflected in particulars (viii) to (xvi) is that Mr Thompson, as a British subject absorbed into the Australian community, is no longer an immigrant and is also not an alien within the meaning of that term as used in the Constitution. The second limb of the constitutional ground, in so far as it relies upon his alleged status as a British subject cannot succeed in light of the decision of the High Court in Shaw.

21 The third issue raises an administrative law ground, based upon the Minister’s alleged failure to have regard to the fact that Mr Thompson was either an Australian citizen or a stateless person. Presumably contingent upon the latter characterisation is the proposition in particular (vi) of ground (b), that the Minister failed to have regard to the Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and did not inform Mr Thompson of his intention not to have regard to it.

22 Mr Thompson was granted his Permanent Resident Entry Permit in August 1985. The Migration Reform Act 1992 (Cth) amended the Migration Act and replaced the permit system with a visa system with effect from 1 September 1994. The Migration Reform (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 1994 provided, by reg 4:

23 Section 501(2) of the Migration Act provides for the cancellation of visas on character grounds as follows:

24 The Australian Citizenship Act 1948 (Cth), at the time of Mr Thompson’s entry into Australia, contained the following provisions relevant to the citizenship status of persons born outside Australia.

26 The term ‘alien’ appeared in various parts of the Act which are also not material for present purposes. That term was defined in s 5(1) as follows:

27 ‘Australia’ was also defined, in s 5(1), for the purposes of the Act thus:

The effect of the definition as it stood in 1969 was that the Trust Territory of New Guinea was not part of Australia, for the purposes of the Act, at the time of Mr Thompson’s birth.

29 Regulation 5 of the Citizenship Regulations 1960, made under the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948-1959 (Cth) provided, inter alia:

Section 8 provided for Irish citizens to have the status of British subjects if certain conditions were fulfilled.

31 In 1975, reg 5A was inserted in the Australian Citizenship Regulations. It provided:

32 Papua New Guinea achieved its independence in 1975. Prior to independence, Papua had been placed by the British Crown under the authority of Australia and administered by Australia as the Territory of Papua under the Papua Act 1905-1940 (Cth). Under a Mandate from the League of Nations the former German possession of New Guinea was administered by Australia under its New Guinea Act 1920-1935 as the Territory of New Guinea. The two Territories were thereafter administered jointly by Australia under the Papua-New Guinea Provisional Administration Act 1945-1946. The Papua and New Guinea Act 1949 provided for the administration of the two Territories. Papua continued as a possession of the Crown. New Guinea had become a Trust Territory administered pursuant to a Trusteeship Agreement approved by the United Nations on 13 December 1946.

33 By s 4 of the Papua New Guinea Independence Act 1975 (Cth) Australia ceased to have ‘any sovereignty, sovereign rights, or rights of administration in respect of and appertaining to the whole or any part of Papua New Guinea.’ The various Papua New Guinea Acts were repealed. Up to independence Papua and New Guinea had retained their distinct characters as Crown possession and Trust Territory respectively. So, up to 9 September 1975 when the Independence Act came into operation, New Guinea was not part of Australia for the purposes of the Australian Citizenship Act 1948.

34 The Constitution of Papua New Guinea provided for the citizenship of the new nation. Independence Day was 16 September 1975. Section 65 of the Constitution provided, in the relevant parts:

36 Mr Thompson was born in the Trust Territory of New Guinea in 1969. He was not therefore born in Australia for the purposes of the Australian Citizenship Act 1948. This is because of the definition of Australia in s 5 of that Act which does not include Trust Territories.

37 According to an uncontested affidavit sworn by Mr Thompson Snr he was employed in both the Trust Territory of New Guinea and the Australian colony of Papua in the 1960s and 1970s. He was employed by a company called ‘Steamships’. He was stationed in Lae in New Guinea for a substantial part of the time and for some part in Port Morseby. He was also stationed at other places that he does not now recall. While working in Papua and New Guinea he met Lynette Tokan, whom he described as a ‘native of Papua and New Guinea’. In 1967, with the permission of her parents and family, they entered into a marriage through local custom. They regarded themselves as married but the marriage was not registered with the Australian authorities. He said he had seen a copy of the statutory declaration from Ms Tokan dated 1 November 1984 confirming their marriage and the birth of their son, Jason. He confirmed that the details contained in the statutory declaration were correct to the best of his knowledge. That statutory declaration, stated that Jason Thompson was born at Angu Hospital in Lae.

38 Mr Thompson Snr and Ms Tokan lived together as a married couple for about eight years. They only had the one child. When they finally parted in 1975, which was shortly prior to independence, Mr Thompson Snr decided to return to Australia. He and his wife agreed that he would take responsibility for Jason and take him to Australia with him. He travelled to Port Morseby with his son and arranged with an Australian official there for his son to travel to Australia with him. Mr Thompson Snr and Jason then flew from Port Morseby to Brisbane. He said that to the best of his knowledge and belief Jason entered Australia and was accepted as his son and as an Australian citizen on 22 August 1975.

39 Shortly after entering Australia, Mr Thompson Snr and his son travelled to Western Australia where they stayed with friends in Guildford. After a few months the people with whom they were staying said they wanted to look after Jason on a permanent basis. Mr Thompson Snr agreed to leave him in their care. He has had limited contact with his son since that time.

40 Counsel for Jason Thompson asked the Court to infer, on the balance of probabilities, that he was registered as an Australian citizen under s 11 of the Australian Citizenship Act 1949-1973. I cannot draw that inference. There is no record of any registration and no evidence from Mr Thompson Snr that any steps were ever taken to effect registration of the birth under s 11 of the Australian Citizenship Act. Because he was born in the Trust Territory of New Guinea, Jason Thompson was born outside Australia for the purposes of s 11. The only way in which he could acquire Australian citizenship by descent was by registration of his birth within five years. This did not happen. He has not since been naturalised. I conclude that he is not an Australian citizen.

41 The question then arises whether Mr Thompson is a citizen of Papua New Guinea. I am prepared to infer, on the evidence, that he has two grandparents who were born in that country, those being his mother’s parents. Information in a cable dated 24 June 1985 from the Department of Foreign Affairs in Port Morseby to the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs in Canberra indicated that Ms Tokan was born in 1948 at Pob Pari Village, Chimbu Province, New Guinea and not in Papua. There is nothing to suggest that either of her parents came from outside Papua and New Guinea. It follows that by reason of s 65(1) of the Constitution of Papua New Guinea, Mr Thompson, as a person born in the country before Independence Day, was automatically entitled to citizenship. He did not have, at the time of Independence, any right to permanent residence in Australia. He was not given a Permanent Resident Entry Permit until 1985. He was not a naturalised Australian citizen, nor registered under s 11 of the Australian Citizenship Act. Nor was he a citizen of a country other than Australia.

42 It would seem therefore, as the respondent submits, that Mr Thompson was and remains a citizen of Papua New Guinea. Section 70 of the Constitution of Papua New Guinea sets out the conditions for automatic loss of citizenship. There is no evidence, nor is it suggested, that there is any basis for saying that Mr Thompson has lost that citizenship under the provisions of s 70.

43 It is also submitted for the respondent that Mr Thompson arrived in Australia as a ‘protected person’ under the Australian Citizenship Act and so was not an alien for the purposes of that Act. I accept that submission. That leaves open the question whether he lies within the reach of the Migration Act which is now based upon the aliens power under s 51(xix) of the Constitution.

44 I conclude, on the citizenship question, that Mr Thompson was neither an Australian citizen nor a stateless person. He was, and it appears still is, a citizen of Papua New Guinea.

45 For the reasons set out above, the first ground of the application cannot succeed. Mr Thompson is not an Australian citizen. He was not a British subject under s 7 of the Australian Citizenship Act because he was not a citizen of a country to which that Act applied. The fact that he was born in a Trust Territory administered by Australia did not make him a subject of the Crown by reason of that administration. When entering Australia he was not an alien as defined by the Australian Citizenship Act as it then stood. This is because he was a ‘protected person’ being a person who met the criteria of that classification under reg 5(1) of the Citizenship Regulations 1960. That is to say, he was not a British subject and he was born in New Guinea.

46 I am prepared to accept that Mr Thompson cannot be regarded as an immigrant in the constitutional sense relevant to the immigration power. Despite his significant criminal record, the fact is he has been in Australia for more than 28 years, having been brought to this country by his father at 6 years of age. After his abandonment by his father in 1977 he was made a ward of the State in Western Australia. He was given a Permanent Resident Visa in 1985. DCS made application for Australian citizenship for him in that year although he did not follow up by attending for interviews. The assumption that, if he ever had the status of an immigrant, he has well and truly lost it now seems a reasonable one.

47 The question remains whether he is now an alien amenable to exclusion from Australia by cancellation of his permission to reside here. He was not an alien for the purpose of the Australian Citizenship Act when he came to Australia. That was because he fell within the definition of a ‘protected person’. That does not determine whether he was an alien at the time that the Minister made the cancellation decision.

48 Shaw’s case does not resolve the question for as Gleeson CJ, Gummow and Hayne JJ said in the judgment in that case at [32]:

That statement of the proposition for which Shaw is authority does not preclude the possibility that a person who is born of an Australian parent outside Australia, but does not acquire Australian citizenship and who acquires the citizenship of another country, is an alien.

49 Their Honours also referred to the observation by Toohey J in Cunliffe v Commonwealth of Australia [1994] HCA 44; (1994) 182 CLR 272 at 375 that:

50 The Parliament cannot enhance the legislative power it enjoys with respect to aliens under s 51(xix) by adopting a statutory definition of the term which is wider than its constitutional meaning – Pochi v Macphee [1982] HCA 60; (1982) 151 CLR 101 at 109 (Gibbs CJ). On the other hand there seems no reason why Parliament, which can define by statute the terms and conditions of Australian citizenship and therefore take people out of the constitutional class of aliens, cannot pass a law that describes a certain class of persons who are not Australian citizens as non-aliens. This is underpinned by the proposition that there is no constitutional concept of Australian citizenship. It does not involve an excess of power. So it is open to Parliament to define a protected person out of alien status as it did with the Australian Citizenship Act as it previously stood. But that status may change. As Gummow and Hayne JJ said in Re Patterson; Ex parte Taylor [2001] HCA 51; (2001) 207 CLR 391 (at [235]):

Their Honours referred to other examples provided by legislation dealing with the consequences of the grant of independence outside the Commonwealth to countries such as Burma. Their Honours went on to say (at [237]):

51 Their Honours approved the observation by Gibbs J in Pochi v Macphee that Parliament cannot expand its legislative power with respect to aliens by a process of statutory definition. However they did say (at [238]):

52 Their Honours put the matter this way in respect of the application of s 501(3) of the Migration Act (at [241]):

53 At the time that the Minister made his decision to cancel the visa in the present case, Mr Thompson was neither an Australian citizen nor a British subject. He was in fact by that time the citizen of a foreign country. Absent any statutory provision to the contrary he was an alien. The fact of his arrival in this country in 1975 does not therefore place him beyond the reach of the exercise of the ministerial power under s 501. The first, and principal ground of the application, ground (a), therefore fails.

54 This ground is premised upon the proposition that Mr Thompson was either an Australian citizen or a stateless person. Neither of those premises is sustained so this ground also fails.

55 Many Australians, having regard to Mr Thompson’s criminal record, would not be sorry to see him go. Nevertheless it might well be thought that he is Australia’s responsibility rather than that of Papua New Guinea. He is the son of an Australian citizen. He came to this country at 6 years of age, over twenty-eight years ago. He has lived in this country ever since. He appears to have been abandoned by his Australian father when he was 8 years old. His upbringing was largely under the supervision of the Department of Community Services in Western Australia and its predecessor, the Department of Community Welfare.

56 A combination of Mr Thompson’s particular circumstances, the laws of Australia and the Constitution of Papua New Guinea mean, in my opinion, that he is not an Australian citizen. His most serious offences were quite abhorrent. But the question could well be asked, as between Australia and Papua New Guinea, who should bear the burden of his presence. Be that as it may, for the reasons which I have set out, the application will be dismissed with costs.

Date	Conviction	Sentence
Under 18 years
28.03.1983	firearm possess no licence	DCW until 18 yrs
28.03.1983	stealing (3 counts)	DCW until 18 yrs
07.07.1983	stealing with violence	probation 12 mths
25.08.1983	stealing	probation 12 mths
24.11.1983	break & enter dwelling with
	intent (3 counts)	DCW 12 mths
15.03.1984	firearm possess no licence	DCW until 18 yrs
14.06.1984	unauthorised use of motor vehicle	DCW until 18 yrs
14.06.1984	dangerous driving 1^st offence	DCW until 18 yrs
14.06.1984	no MDL	DCW until 18 yrs
23.08.1984	assault aggravated	$50 fine
23.08.1984	going armed so as to cause fear	GB bond $100 6 mths
17.12.1984	stealing	$30 fine
10.01.1985	reckless driving	CWD 6 mths, disq hold MDL 6 mths
10.01.1985	unauthorised use of motor vehicle	CWD 6 mths, disq hold MDL 6 mths
10.01.1985	no MDL	CWD 6 mths, disq hold MDL 6 mths
11.03.1985	on premises without lawful excuse	DCW until 18 yrs
30.05.1986	break and enter	strict custody until Governor’s
		pleasure, thereafter in safe
		custody in place as Governor
		may direct
30.05.1986	rape	strict custody until Governor’s
		pleasure, thereafter in safe
		custody in place as Governor
		may direct
30.05.1986	unlawful and indecent dealing	strict custody until Governor’s
	with child under 14 yrs	pleasure, thereafter in safe
		custody in place as Governor
		may direct

Over 18 years

04.12.1990	excess 0.08%	MDL canc. Disq 3 mths, $300 fine
03.01.1991	no MDL	MDL canc. Disq 3 mths, $300 fine
03.01.1991	speeding 106/70k zone	MDL canc, disq 3 mths conc, $100 fine
03.01.1991	false name & address to policeman	MDL canc, disq 3 mths conc, $100 fine
03.01.1991	using false licence, calculated to deceive	MDL canc. Disq 3 mths conc, $100 fine
03.01.1991	false name	$100 fine
18.03.1991	stealing (4 counts)	1-2. $50 each charge
		3-4. $100 each charge
18.03.1991	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 9 mths cum,
		100 hrs CSO
18.03.1991	using a vehicle contrary to	$50 fine
	conditions of yellow work order
19.06.1991	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 9 mths cum, $1000 fine
26.08.1991	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 9 mths cum, $2000 fine
26.08.1991	false name & address to patrolman	MDL canc. disq 3 mths conc, $50 fine
26.08.1991	false name	$50 fine
27.09.1991	disorderly fighting	$100 fine
16.11.1993	escape legal custody (2 counts)	1. 2 mths imprisonment cum
		2. 3 mths imprisonment cum
16.11.1993	false name & address	MDL disq 3 mths, $150 fine
16.11.1993	receiving (3 counts)	$500 fine each charge
16.11.1993	unlawful possession	$500 fine
16.11.1993	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 18 mths cum,
		6 mths imprisonment
16.11.1993	false name & address to patrolman	MDL canc, disq 3 mths conc,
		1 mth imprisonment
16.11.1993	using false licence, calculated to deceive	MDL canc, disq 3mths conc, $800 fine

16.11.1993	using false licence, calculated to deceive	MDL canc, disq 3 mths conc, $500 fine
16.11.1993	unlicensed vehicle	$250 fine
29.11.1994	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 9 mths cum
		3 mths imprisonment
29.11.1994	stealing a motor vehicle	MDL canc, disq 3 mths conc,
		3 mths imprisonment
29.11.1994	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 9 mths cum,
		3 mths imprisonment conc.
29.11.1994	stealing a motor vehicle	MDL canc, disq 3 mths conc,
		3 mths imprisonment
29.11.1994	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 9 mths cum,
		3 mths imprisonment conc
29.11.1994	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 3 mths conc
29.11.1994	escape legal custody	1 mth imprisonment
29.11.1994	stealing	1 mth imprisonment conc.
29.11.1994	stealing a motor vehicle	1. 6 mths imprisonment conc.
	(3 counts)	2. 3 mths imprisonment cum.
		3. 3 mths imprisonment conc.
29.11.1994	unlawful procession	3 mths imprisonment conc.
26.05.1995	amphetamine use	$200 fine
26.05.1995	cannabis possess a qty	$100 fine
26.05.1995	on prem/curt w/out lawful excuse	$100 fine
26.05.1995	resist arrest	$200 fine
26.05.1995	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 2 yrs cum,
		9 mths imprisonment
26.05.1995	no MDL	MDL disq 2 yrs cum,
		9 mths imprisonment conc.
26.05.1995	reckless driving (prescribed)	MDL canc, disqu 18 mths conc,
		3 mths imprisonment conc.
26.05.1995	dangerous driving (prescribed)	MDL canc, disq 12 mths conc,
		3 mths imprisonment conc.
26.05.1995	fail to stop when called upon	MDL canc, disq 3 mths conc, $200 fine
	(prescribed)
13.05.1996	use forges or fraudulently altered	MDL canc, disq 3 mths, $200 fine
	number plate
13.05.1996	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 9 mths cum, $500 fine
13.05.1996	amphetamine possession	$200 fine
13.05.1996	assault common	$500 fine
13.05.1996	cannabis possess a qty	$150 fine
27.05.1997	burglary & commit offence (habitat)	12 mths imprisonment
		MDL disq 6 mths
26.06.1997	stealing	3 mths imprisonment
20.03.1998	burglary & commit offence (habitat)	10 yrs imprisonment
20.03.1998	child stealing	5 yrs imprisonment conc.
20.03.1998	drugs prohibited use	1 mth imprisonment conc.
20.03.1998	no MDL	MDL canc, disq 12 mths cum,
		12 mths imprisonment
20.3.1998	driving under the influence	MDL canc, disq 6 mths conc, $500 fine
20.03.1998	fail to stop when called upon	MDL canc, disq 3 mths conc, $100 fine

BETWEEN:	JASON ANTHONY THOMPSON APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	FRENCH J
DATE OF ORDER:	26 FEBRUARY 2004
WHERE MADE:	PERTH

BETWEEN:	JASON ANTHONY THOMPSON APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr HNH Christie

Solicitor for the Applicant:	Christie Strbac

Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr JD Allanson

Solicitor for the Respondent:	Australian Government Solicitor

Date of Hearing:	1 April 2003 – Judgment deferred pending Shaw’s case.

Date of Judgment:	26 February 2004

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	W5 OF 2002

JUDGE:	FRENCH J
DATE:	26 FEBRUARY 2004
PLACE:	PERTH

Federal Court of Australia

Thompson v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2004] FCA 139 (26 February 2004)