Akhtar (Migration)

[2019] AATA 6905

Akhtar (Migration) [2019] AATA 6905 (22 August 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Ahsan Akhtar

CASE NUMBER:  1621783

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2016/3004251

MEMBER:P. Maishman

DATE:22 August 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Perth

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.

Statement made on 22 August 2019 at 4:26pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine temporary entrant – study at lower level than previous highest and than required by visa type – higher education visa cancelled – applicant’s and parents’ health – vague future plans – no current enrolment – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 359A, 359AA
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 500.212

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection on 1 December 2016 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 9 September 2016. At the time of application, Class TU contained two subclasses: Subclass 500 (Student) and Subclass 590 (Student Guardian). The applicant applied for the visa to undertake study in Australia and does not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa.

3. The delegate in this case refused to grant the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements of cl.500.212(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations) because the delegate was not satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily.

4. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 19 June 2018 to give evidence and present arguments.

5. The applicant was assisted in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.

6. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that decision under review should be affirmed.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

7. The Tribunal had before it a copy of the Department’s file containing the application for a student visa and documents relevant to the application. The information on the file shows the applicant is a 27-year-old citizen of Pakistan. He has not previously been married and has no dependent children. At the time of application his father, mother and two brothers resided in Pakistan. The applicant completed a Master of Commerce at the Hazara University in Pakistan.

8. The applicant provided a copy of the delegate’s decision record to the Tribunal with his application for review. The delegate notes the applicant was granted a TU 573 (Higher Education) visa based on his enrolment to study Master of Professional Accounting between 23 July 2014 and 11 July 2016. The delegate was concerned the applicant’s enrolment in Master of Professional Accounting was cancelled on 6 November 2014 because the applicant transferred to studies at a lower level. The applicant was not enrolled in a Higher Education course between 6 November 2014 and 11 September 2016 and completed a Diploma and an Advanced Diploma of Business from 20 July 2015 to 31 July 2016.  The delegate noted Diploma and Advanced Diploma courses are Vocational level courses and the applicant was in breach of the conditions attached to his Higher Education visa.  The delegate noted the applicant’s comments in respect of his transfer in studies that he was not prepared for the complexity and depth of knowledge required for the higher education level studies and struggled to make friends and adapt to a new way of life.

9. The applicant provided the Tribunal a written response on 26 April 2018 to an invitation by the Tribunal to complete a questionnaire entitled Request for Student Visa Information.

10. At the hearing of the application on 19 June 2018 the applicant gave the Tribunal a typed letter about his circumstances, receipts for pathology and radiology services dated 4 June 2018 and 13 June 2018 respectively, a confirmation of enrolment created 19 December 2017 showing enrolment in a Graduate Diploma of Business Administration from 21 May 2018 to 17 May 2019, an offer of admission dated 21 January 2015 from Australian School of Management, a cardiologist letter dated 15 March 2018, a consultant laparoscopic surgeons letter dated 6 January 2018, a urologist surgeons letter dated 13 December 2016, and results of studies in the Diploma and Advanced Diploma of Business dated 17 August 2016.

11. Adopting the procedure in s.359AA of the Act, the Tribunal put to the applicant information about the applicant's enrolment records from the Provider Registration International Student Management System (PRISMS) database held on the Tribunal file. For completeness, the Tribunal provided the applicant with a copy of the PRISMS summary of enrolment. The Tribunal explained to the applicant the relevance of the records to the review before the Tribunal. The Tribunal explained the consequences of relying on the information and confirmed the applicant understood the consequences of the information being relied upon. The Tribunal offered the applicant an opportunity to seek an adjournment to consider the information and comment on or respond to the information. The applicant did not seek an adjournment and elected to respond to the information during the course of the hearing.

12. The applicant gave evidence that his mother, father, brothers and sister continue to reside in Pakistan. The applicant arrived in Australia as a student in 2014 and has travelled back to Pakistan in January 2017 and January 2018 to see his parents who had been unwell. The applicant stays in touch with his family by telephone every few days. The applicant shares accommodation in Australia with a few friends, known to him from Pakistan, who are like his brothers. Prior to coming to Australia the applicant worked as an accounts analyst earning approximately AU$5000 per annum. The applicant was supported by his father and not employed at the time of the hearing but has previously worked in Australia as a console operator and earned about AU$14,000 per annum. Chinese interests are developing infrastructure through Pakistan which will enable the applicant to start an import/export business. The applicant believes he could earn $60,000 per year if he becomes qualified. Australian qualifications are valued in Pakistan and will have a better impact on his career prospects and qualifications from home. The applicant has no military service commitments and has no political or civil unrest concerns.

13. Prior to making its decision the Tribunal obtained an up-to-date report from PRISMS which indicated that the applicant did not have a current confirmation of enrolment. On 27 May 2019 the Tribunal wrote to the review applicant pursuant to s.359A of the Act, inviting the review applicant to provide comments in writing on information that it considered would be the reason, or part of the reason, for affirming the decision under review. The applicant provided a written response showing he enrolled in a Bachelor of Business degree on 7 June 2019. The applicant gave the Tribunal an unsigned, undated typed letter saying his enrolment in the Graduate Diploma of Business was cancelled because he had been unable to complete his previous course beyond the first trimester because of hypertension. His father had motivated him to complete the Bachelor of Business he enrolled in in June 2019 so he can go back to Pakistan and help him in his business.   

14. The criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa are set out in Part 500 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The primary criteria in cl.500.211 to cl.500.218 must be satisfied by at least one applicant. The issue in the present case is whether the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily.

    Genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student (cl.500.212)

15. Clause 500.212 requires as follows:

    The applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student because:

    (a)the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily, having regard to:

    (i)the applicant’s circumstances; and

    (ii)the applicant’s immigration history; and

    (iii)if the applicant is a minor—the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant; and

    (iv)any other relevant matter; and

    (b)the applicant intends to comply with any conditions subject to which the visa is granted, having regard to:

    (i)the applicant’s record of compliance with any condition of a visa previously held by the applicant (if any); and

    (ii)the applicant’s stated intention to comply with any conditions to which the visa may be subject; and

    (c)of any other relevant matter.

    Does the applicant intend genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily?

16. In considering whether the applicant satisfies cl.500.212(a), the Tribunal must have regard to Direction No.69, ‘Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa and Student Guardian visa applications’, made under s.499 of the Act. This Direction, which is attached to this decision, requires the Tribunal to have regard to a number of specified factors in relation to:

    ·the applicant’s circumstances in their home country, potential circumstances in Australia, and the value of the course to the applicant’s future;

    ·the applicant’s immigration history, including previous applications for an Australian visa or for visas to other countries, and previous travel to Australia or other countries;

    ·if the applicant is a minor, the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant; and

    ·any other relevant information provided by the applicant, or information otherwise available to the decision maker, including information that may be either beneficial or unfavourable to the applicant.

17. The Direction indicates that the factors specified should not be used as a checklist but rather, are intended only to guide decision makers when considering the applicant’s circumstances as a whole, in reaching a finding about whether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion.

    The applicant’s circumstances in Pakistan, potential circumstances in Australia, and the value of the course to the applicant’s future

18. Prior to coming to Australia to study in 2014 the applicant worked for City Management Consultants as an accounts analyst in Pakistan earning around $5000 annually. The applicant worked as a console operator in Australia until June 2017 earning an annual salary of around AU$14,000 annually. At the time of hearing, the applicant is not employed and is fully supported by his father. At the time of application the applicant claimed to be seeking employment as a HR manager on his return to Pakistan. At hearing the applicant said that he wanted to commence an import/export business and considered he would make the equivalent of AU$60,000. At the time of this decision the applicant said he wanted to complete his course so he can go back to Pakistan and help his father.  The applicant said equivalent courses and qualifications from Pakistan were not as good as those from Australia. 

19. The Tribunal considers that the applicant’s future plans on his return to Pakistan are vague and generic. The applicant’s plan contained little detail or specifics. The Tribunal was not persuaded the applicant had undertaken any genuine research about the potential for an import business. Notwithstanding that an Australian qualification might be highly regarded and valued in Pakistan, there is no evidentiary basis that supports the applicant’s aspirational earnings of $60,000 annually if he has an Australian qualification.

20. The Tribunal acknowledges the applicant’s evidence that he is not presently employed in Australia, however the Tribunal is not persuaded the applicant could not readily find low skilled employment in Australia earning significantly more than the annual payment that he received while working in Pakistan.

21. The applicant’s mother, father, brothers and sister continue to live in Pakistan. The applicant visited his family in Pakistan when his mother and father were sick and he is otherwise able to maintain contact with his family sufficiently via a few phone calls each week. In Perth he resides with friends from Pakistan who are like his brothers. The Tribunal finds the applicant is able to maintain his ties to his immediate family in Pakistan with weekly phone calls and has a close group of friends in Australia. The Tribunal does not consider the applicant’s family ties in Pakistan to be a significant incentive for him to leave Australia.

22. The applicant did not declare any military service commitments or political and civil unrest in Pakistan that would act as a significant incentive for him not to return. The Tribunal is satisfied such a claim does not arise on the material before it.

23. The Tribunal is not persuaded that the applicant’s personal and family ties in Pakistan and the value of an Australian qualification to his future in Pakistan are an incentive for him to return to Pakistan when considering his potential circumstances in Australia.

    The applicant’s immigration history

24. The applicant completed a Bachelor of Commerce and Master of Commerce in 2013 at Hazara University in Pakistan. He came to Australia in July 2014 after being granted a subclass 573 (Higher Education) student visa on the basis of his enrolment in Master of Professional Accounting course. The applicant’s enrolment in a Higher Education course was cancelled from 6 November 2014 because the applicant left the course. In breach of the conditions of the 573 visa, the applicant undertook vocational level courses from 5 January 2015 to 31 July 2016.

25. The Tribunal had regard to the applicant’s explanation that he was unprepared for the complexity of the higher education course and had difficulty making friends. The Tribunal acknowledges that the applicant undertook vocational level studies between 5 January 2015 and 31 July 2016, however the applicant was in breach of the conditions of the visa granted to him to study at a Higher Education level. The delegate notes the applicant had studied to Masters level in Pakistan and demonstrated that he had researched the Australian course requirements. The applicant did not leave Australia when his higher education course enrolment was cancelled. The Tribunal does not accept the applicant was unprepared for the complexity of higher education studies.  It was within the applicant’s control to either leave Australia as he was not complying with the terms of his visa, or to take steps to comply.   

26. The applicant applied for the visa subject of this application on 9 September 2016. At the time of application he was enrolled in a Certificate IV in Human Resources course which started on 22 August 2016 and was to finish on 20 August 2017 and a Diploma of Human Resources Management commencing from 4 September 2017 and concluding on 2 September 2018. The applicant obtained an enrolment deferment for compassionate or compelling reasons on 11 January 2017. The applicant says he returned back from seeing his mother in March 2017. He did not recommence his course on his return to Australia because he was concerned for, and missing his mother, and was mentally stressed. The applicant’s enrolment in Diploma of Human Resources Management was cancelled for non-commencement from 15 June 2017.

27. In January 2018 the applicant visited his father who was unwell in Pakistan. The applicant said he was granted a bridging Visa that allowed him to travel and return to Australia. The applicant attended a cardiologist who, in March 2018, diagnosed hypertension and recommended he take hypertension tablets along with antidepressants. The applicant says he returned to Australia at the start of April but did not resume studies until he commenced a Graduate Diploma of Business Administration in which he was enrolled and which started on 21 May 2018 and concluded on 17 May 2019.

28. The applicant told the Tribunal he did not study after January 2017 because he was so stressed out and know what to do.  

29. The Tribunal does not accept the applicant’s assertion that he was unable to undertake studies on his return to Australia from seeing his mother. There is no medical evidence that supports that the applicant was suffering any condition or was unable to undertake studies once he returned to Australia. Despite the applicant’s claimed stress condition he was capable of travel to and from Australia. The applicant took no steps to engage in or withdraw from the course, obtain a further deferment, or return to his home in Pakistan.

30. Prior to making the decision the Tribunal obtained an up-to-date copy of the PRISMS record which showed the applicant’s did not hold a certificate of enrolment in any course.  The Tribunal sent the applicant an invitation to comment on the information that he did not hold a current confirmation of enrolment and on 10 June 2019 the applicant gave the Tribunal a confirmation of enrolment in a bachelor of business degree commencing on 22 July 2019 and concluding on 30 June 2022. The Tribunal had regard to the applicant’s written response that he was his enrolment was cancelled because he had been unable to complete his previous course beyond the first trimester because of hypertension and the receipts provided for pathology and radiological services.

31. The Tribunal is not satisfied that the pathological and radiological services receipts support the applicant’s assertion that he was unable to complete the Graduate Diploma of Business Administration course in which he was enrolled and which started on 21 May 2018 because of hypertension. 

32. The Tribunal finds that the applicant remained in Australia contrary to the conditions attached to his visa when his enrolment in a Higher Education course of study ceased on 6 November 2014. The applicant enrolled in a course when he made his visa application but following deferment he did not participate further and his enrolment ceased. He was not enrolled in any course until 21 May 2018 and that enrolment ceased in 15 October 2018 without the applicant completing the course. The Tribunal is of the view that the confirmation of enrolment provided to the Tribunal showing the applicant enrolled in a Bachelor of Business from 22 July 2019 was obtained purely to meet the requirement for the visa and not because the applicant is a genuine student.

33. The Tribunal is concerned that the applicant’s immigration pattern and inability to complete any course in which he has been enrolled indicates that the applicant is not a genuine student.

34. The Tribunal has considered all the information provided by the applicant in support of his application. The Tribunal is not satisfied that the information provided by the applicant regarding circumstances in his own country, potential circumstances in Australia, the value of the proposed course to his future, his immigration history and other relevant matters are sufficient to demonstrate that he is a genuine temporary entrant to Australia.

35. The factors considered by the Tribunal indicate that the applicant appears to be using the student visa program as a means of maintaining ongoing residence in Australia and does not have a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily.

36. On the basis of the above, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. Accordingly, the applicant does not meet cl.500.212(a).

37. For cl.500.212 to be satisfied, paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) must all be satisfied. Given the Tribunal has found that paragraph (a) is not met, it is not necessary to consider paragraphs (b) and (c). Accordingly, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl.500.212.

1. Given the above findings, the Tribunal finds that the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 500 (Student) visa are not met. The applicant does not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa. Accordingly, the decision under review must be affirmed.

   DECISION

2. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.

   P. Maishman
   Member

   
   

   Attachment – Direction No.69

   DIRECTION NUMBER 69 – ASSESSING THE GENUINE TEMPORARY ENTRANT CRITERION FOR STUDENT VISA AND STUDENT GUARDIAN VISA APPLICATIONS

   (Section 499)

   I, PETER DUTTON, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection give this Direction under section 499 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

   Dated: 18 April 2016

   Peter Dutton

   
   

   Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

   Note: Section 499(1) of the Act empowers the Minister to give a written direction to a person or body having functions or powers under the Act if the directions are about the performance of those functions; or the exercise of those powers. Under section 499(2) of the Act, the direction must not be inconsistent with the Act or the Migration Regulations 1994. Under section 499(2A) of the Act, the person or body must comply with the Direction.

   Part 1 of Direction No. 69 - Preliminary

   Name of Direction

   This Direction is Direction No. 69 - Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa and Student Guardian visa applications.

   It may be cited as Direction No. 69.

   Commencement

   This Direction commences on 1 July 2016.

   Interpretation

   Act means the Migration Act 1958.

   Genuine temporary entrant means a person who satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa or Student Guardian visa applications.

   Genuine temporary entrant criterion refers to clause 500.212(a), 500.312(a) and 590.215(a) at Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

   Home country has the same meaning as the definition of that term in regulation 1.03 in Part 1 of the Regulations.

   Regulations mean the Migration Regulations 1994.

   Relative has the same meaning as the definition of that term in regulation 1.03 in Part 1 of the Regulations.

   Spouse has the same meaning as the definition of the term in section 5F of the Act.

   Student visa means a Subclass 500 (Student) visa

   Student Guardian visa means a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa.

   Application

   This Direction applies to delegates performing functions or exercising powers under section 65 of the Act in relation to assessing an applicant’s temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications in Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

   This Direction also applies to members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal who review the decisions of primary decision-makers in relation to a Student visa or a Student Guardian visa application.

   The genuine temporary entrant criterion must be satisfied by all applicants who make an application for either a Student visa seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for a Student Guardian visa.

   Preamble

   The Australian Government operates a student visa programme that enables people who are not Australian citizens or Australian permanent residents to undertake study in Australia. A person who wants to undertake a course of study under the student visa programme must obtain a student visa before they can commence a course of study in Australia.  A successful applicant must be both a genuine temporary entrant and a genuine student.

   An applicant who is a genuine temporary entrant will have circumstances that support a genuine intention to temporarily enter and remain in Australia, notwithstanding the potential for this intention to change over time to an intention to utilise lawful means to remain in Australia for an extended period of time or permanently.

   The genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications requires the Minister to be satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily, having regard to:

   a.the applicant’s circumstances; and

   b.the applicant’s immigration history; and

   c.if the applicant is a minor — the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant; and

   d.any other relevant matter.

   This Direction provides guidance to decision makers on what factors require consideration when assessing the above paragraphs a to d, to determine whether the applicant genuinely intends to stay in Australia temporarily.

   Decision makers must take a reasonable and balanced approach between the need to make a timely decision on a Student visa or Student Guardian visa application and the need to identify those applicants who, at time of decision, do not genuinely intend to stay in Australia temporarily

   Part 2 of Direction No. 69 - Directions

   Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion

   1.Decision makers should not use the factors specified in this Direction as a checklist. The listed factors are intended only to guide decision makers when considering the applicant’s circumstances as a whole, in reaching a finding about whether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion.

   2.Decision makers should assess whether, on balance, the genuine temporary entrant criterion is satisfied, by:

   a.considering the applicant against all factors specified in this Direction; and

   b.considering any other relevant information provided by the applicant (or information otherwise available to the decision maker).

   3.Decision makers may request additional information and/or further evidence from the applicant to demonstrate that they are a genuine temporary entrant, where closer scrutiny of the applicant's circumstances is considered appropriate.

   4.Circumstances where further scrutiny may be appropriate include but are not limited to:

   a.information in statistical, intelligence and analysis reports on migration fraud and immigration compliance compiled by the department indicates the need for further scrutiny;

   b.the applicant or a relative of the applicant has an immigration history of reasonable concern;

   c.the applicant intends to study in a field unrelated to their previous studies or employment; and

   d.apparent inconsistencies in information provided by the applicant in their Student visa application.

   5.An application for a Student visa or a Student Guardian visa should be refused if, after weighing up the applicant’s circumstances, immigration history and any other relevant matter, the decision maker is not satisfied that the applicant genuinely intends a temporary stay in Australia.

   The applicant’s circumstances

   6.Decision makers should have regard to the applicant’s circumstances in their home country and the applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia.

   7.For primary applicants of Subclass 500 Student visas, decision makers should have regard to the value of the course to the applicant’s future.

   8.Weight should be placed on an applicant’s circumstances that indicate that the Student visa or Student Guardian visa is intended primarily for maintaining residence in Australia.

   The applicant’s circumstances in their home country

   9.When considering the applicant’s circumstances in their home country, decision makers should have regard to the following factors:

   a.whether the applicant has reasonable reasons for not undertaking the study in their home country or region if a similar course is already available there. Decision makers should allow for any reasonable motives established by the applicant;

   b.the extent of the applicant’s personal ties to their home country (for example family, community and employment) and whether those circumstances would serve as a significant incentive to return to their home country;

   c.economic circumstances of the applicant that would present as a significant incentive for the applicant not to return to their home country. These circumstances may include consideration of the applicant’s circumstances relative to the home country and to Australia;

   d.military service commitments that would present as a significant incentive for the applicant not to return to their home country; and

   e.political and civil unrest in the applicant’s home country. This includes situations of a nature that may induce the applicant to apply for a Student visa or Student Guardian visa as means of obtaining entry to Australia for the purpose of remaining indefinitely. Decision makers should be aware of the changing circumstances in the applicant’s home country and the influence these may have on an applicant’s motivations for applying for a Student visa or a Student Guardian visa.

   10.Decision makers may have regard to the applicant’s circumstances in their home country relative to the circumstances of others in that country.

   The applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia

   11.In considering the applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia, decision makers should have regard to the following factors:

   a.The applicant’s ties with Australia which would present as a strong incentive to remain in Australia. This may include family and community ties;

   b.evidence that the student visa programme is being used to circumvent the intentions of the migration programme;

   c.whether the Student visa or Student Guardian visa is being used to maintain ongoing residence;

   dwhether the primary and secondary applicant(s) have entered into a relationship of concern for a successful Student visa outcome. Where a decision maker determines that an applicant and dependant have contrived their relationship for a successful Student visa outcomes, the decision maker may find that both applicants do not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion; and

   e.the applicant’s knowledge of living in Australia and their intended course of study and the associated education provider; including previous study and qualifications, what is a realistic level of knowledge an applicant is expected to know and the level of research the applicant has undertaken into their proposed course of study and living arrangements.

   Value of the course to the applicant’s future

   12.Decision makers should have regard to the following factors when considering the value of the course to the applicant’s future:

   a.whether the student is seeking to undertake a course that is consistent with their current level of education and whether the course will assist the applicant to obtain employment or improve employment prospects in their home country. Decision makers should allow for reasonable changes to career or study pathways; and

   b.relevance of the course to the student’s past or proposed future employment either in their home country or a third country; and

   c.remuneration the applicant could expect to receive in the home country or a third country, compared with Australia, using the qualifications to be gained from the proposed course of study.

   The applicant's immigration history

   13.An applicant’s immigration history refers both to their visa and travel history.

   14.When considering the applicant’s immigration history, decision makers should have regard to the following factors:

   a.Previous visa applications for Australia or other countries, including:

   i.if the applicant previously applied for an Australian temporary or permanent visa, whether those visa applications are yet to be finally determined (within the meaning of subsection 5(9) of the Act), were granted, or grounds on which the application(s) were refused; and

   ii.if the applicant has previously applied for visa(s) to other countries, whether the applicant was refused a visa and the circumstances that led to visa refusal.

   b.Previous travels to Australia or other countries, including:

   i.if the applicant previously travelled to Australia, whether they complied with the conditions of their visa and left before their visa ceased, and if not, were there circumstances beyond their control;

   ii.whether the applicant previously held a visa that was cancelled or considered for cancellation, and the associated circumstances;

   iii.the amount of time the applicant has spent in Australia and whether the Student visa or Student Guardian visa may be used primarily for maintaining ongoing residence, including whether the applicant has undertaken a series of short, inexpensive courses, or has been onshore for some time without successfully completing a qualification; and

   iv.if the applicant has travelled to countries other than Australia, whether they complied with the migration laws of that country and the circumstances around any non-compliance

   If the applicant is a minor— the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant

   15.If the primary or secondary applicant for a Subclass 500 Student visa is a minor, decision makers should have regard to the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant.

   Any other relevant matters

   16.Decision makers should also have regard to any other relevant information provided by the applicant (or information otherwise available to the decision maker) when assessing the applicant’s intention to temporarily stay in Australia. This includes information that may be either beneficial or unfavourable to the applicant.