Arciaga (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant the applicant a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The applicant failed to provide requested information to the Tribunal, and the Tribunal considered that this meant the applicant was not entitled to a hearing. The primary issue was whether the applicant met the genuine temporary entrant criterion, specifically the requirement of being enrolled in a course of study at the time of the decision.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied clause 500.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which mandates enrolment in a full-time registered course at the time of the decision. The Tribunal examined the definition of "course of study" and "registered course" under the Regulations. It noted that the applicant's agent had indicated she was not studying in June 2019, and a review of the Provider Registration and International Student Management System (PRISMS) on 5 November 2019 showed no enrolment since the completion of an intensive English course on 3 August 2018.

The Tribunal applied the principles of administrative review by seeking further information from the applicant regarding her enrolment, as indicated by the PRISMS record. The applicant was given an opportunity to respond to this information, which suggested she was not enrolled in a course of study. Despite being informed that failure to respond could lead to a decision being made without further input and the loss of entitlement to a hearing, the applicant did not provide any comments or response by the deadline. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was enrolled in a course of study at the time of the decision, and therefore, clause 500.211 was not met.

As the applicant did not meet the primary criteria for the Subclass 500 (Student) visa and did not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.