ARIF (Migration)

ARIF (Migration) [2020] AATA 456 (18 February 2020)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT:  Mr Hasan Md Arif
CASE NUMBER:  1809625
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2018/842188
MEMBER:Peter Booth
DATE:18 February 2020
PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne
DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.
Statement made on 18 February 2020 at 9:13am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine temporary entrant – ties to home country – length of stay in Australia – study history – value of course – vague future plans – income disparity – decision under review affirmed
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 500.212

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 21 March 2018 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
The applicant applied for the visa on 21 February 2018. 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.
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 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations) because the applicant was not a genuine temporary entrant.
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 10 February 2020 to give evidence and present arguments.
The applicant was assisted in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
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. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need only satisfy the secondary criteria. The issue in the present case is whether the applicant is a genuine temporary entrant.
Genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student (cl.500.212)
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?
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.
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 gave evidence at the hearing the substance of which was as follows. The applicant had read the delegate’s decision dated 21 March 2018 refusing his application for a student visa. The applicant understood that the issue for determination was whether he was a genuine temporary entrant.
The applicant confirmed that he is enrolled in a Master of Business Administration course which is due to commence on 23 March 2020 and to be completed on 15 July 2020. He produced a confirmation of enrolment document in that regard. In answer to a question from the Tribunal he said that he had applied for this course in “in November”.
The applicant said that he had completed one year of an accountancy course in his home country prior to arriving in Australia.
The applicant arrived in Australia on 2 November 2008 as the holder of a “student” visa. He said that his intention was to undertake a diploma of accounting but later changed this to be an intention to complete a diploma of business management course.
The applicant has returned to Bangladesh on six occasions since arriving in Australia. The shortest period of departure from Australia to Bangladesh was 11 days, the longest period was 31 days.
The applicant has an extensive study history in Australia. Between November 2008 and November 2009 he completed a diploma of business management, this was followed by a certificate III in printing and graphic arts between February 2010 and December 2010, between January 2011 and June 2012 he completed an advanced diploma of accounting. He was enrolled in but did not complete a bachelor of accounting course which commenced in March 2012. He then completed a bachelor of business (accounting) between March 2014 and July 2016. He completed a professional year of accounting between December 2016 and October 2017. He was enrolled in a master of professional accounting between March 2018 and November 2019 but did not complete it. He is currently enrolled in the master of business administration course described above. The Tribunal invited the applicant to explain his study history, in particular his failure to complete the bachelor of accounting course. He said the reason was “personal difficulty, has difficulty to learn, accounting was hard, founder semester, my father had problems, he was a heart patient, I went home, and that I came back, I was mentally depressed, told Institute I was having difficulty, it was accepted”. He went on to say “I mentioned it to the Dean, the classes were overcrowded, I did not understand, place of study was not good enough, I moved and completed a bachelor of accounting between 2014 and 2016. Between 2013 and 2012 I couldn’t complete study”. The Tribunal invited the applicant to add anything further to which he said “I completed the professional year, I want to finish the MBA, want to get a job in my home country”.
The Tribunal enquired whether the applicant could undertake the master of business administration course in Bangladesh to which he said “no”. He did not elaborate. The Tribunal enquired as to his employment intentions when he returns to Bangladesh. He responded “a senior executive in accounting and finance”. He did not elaborate. In answer to a question from the Tribunal he estimated his income when he returns to Bangladesh to be between AU$550 and AU$750 monthly. The Tribunal enquired whether the applicant is currently employed in Australia to which he said “casual, printing company”. He did not elaborate. The Tribunal enquired as to his income from that employment which he said “it depends, $500 or $600”. He did not elaborate. He added that he is not currently employed.
The applicant’s family in Bangladesh comprises his mother, father and three sisters. As to assets in Bangladesh he said that his father had transferred land into his name, that this had taken two years, and that his father “has a six story building”. He did not elaborate. The Tribunal enquired as to the value of his assets in Bangladesh to which he said “AU$100,000”.
The applicant, in information separately provided to the Tribunal, provided some details of the various visas which he has held. He was granted a student visa in September 2008 which was valid until March 2010, a second student visa was granted in March 2010 and which was valid until March 2012, third student visa was granted in April 2012 and which was valid until March 2014, fourth student visa was granted in April 2014 and which was valid until May 2016, fifth student visa was granted in May 2016 and which was valid until March 2018. The applicant was also granted a temporary graduate visa in August 2016 which was valid until February 2018. It appears from the delegate’s decision record that the student visa application the subject of this proceeding was made on 21 February 2018.
The applicant confirmed that in the period in which he held a higher education visa he did not complete any higher education course.
The applicant informed the Tribunal that he had not applied for permanent residency in Australia and did not intend to do so.
In information separately provided to the Tribunal the applicant stated regarding his reasons for studying in Australia:
the reason I came to Australia was to do accounting course, same as I wanted to do in Bangladesh. I studied one and a half year in Bachelor of Accounting in Dhaka already when I stopped and came to Australia when my visa was granted. Australian degree in accounting will help me to secure a job in many big international companies in Bangladesh with very good pay. With a local accounting degree, I would only be able to find a job in local small firms. After I finished my bachelor degree, I was more confident with my studies. With MPA, it provides me with more opportunities at more professional and higher level of skills in organizations such as banks and government jobs. The MBA is because I was offered to do this course with six months after I finish MPA, With MBA, I can also look for management roles in business. Jobs are very competitive in Bangladesh. With three degrees from Australia, I am confident and certain that I will be able to secure good job offers from best companies or government sectors in Bangladesh.
In answer to a question as to why the applicant had not undertaken the current course in his home country the applicant stated:
I was enrolled to study accounting in Bangladesh, but as soon as I received a visa to Australia, I gave it up. This is because the local degrees are not as favorable as Australian degrees in employment in Bangladesh and the pay is much lower. I would be in a much better position in terms of job prospect both in private and public sectors in Bangladesh if I have Australian degree than local degree. It provides me life time benefit if I have formal Australian degree qualifications.
In answer to a question regarding his future employment plans the applicant stated:
I will return to Bangladesh once I completed MBA. I have been in Australia for too long and my parents have already started to look for a suitable girl for me to marry in Bangladesh. I have asked my college friends to look for jobs for me. I plan to work in large international companies or government agencies once I returned to Bangladesh.
In considering whether the applicant has met the genuine temporary entry criterion, the Tribunal had regard to the following factors consistent with cl.500.212 and the Ministerial Direction No.69. The factors were used to weigh up the applicant’s circumstances as a whole, in reaching a finding about whether he has satisfied the genuine temporary entrant criterion.
The Tribunal has considered the applicant’s circumstances in his home country. The applicant is unmarried and is from Bangladesh. The applicant has provided evidence of social, direct family and financial ties to his home country or other economic incentives to return. When considering the applicant’s circumstances in his home country, the Tribunal therefore finds that he has been able to demonstrate ties to act as an incentive to return to his home country at the completion of the proposed study. The Tribunal accepts that the applicant may have family ties to Bangladesh, however, given the time the applicant has spent in Australia and the intended period of future stay in Australia, the Tribunal is not satisfied that there is a significant incentive for the applicant to return to Bangladesh.
The Tribunal has considered the applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia. The applicant first arrived in Australia on 2 November 2008 as a holder of “student” visa valid to March 2010. The proposed study would extend the applicant’s stay until at least July 2020. The Tribunal finds that the length of this proposed additional stay creates serious concerns that the applicant is studying for the purposes of staying in Australia. Whilst the Tribunal accepts that plans can change, this is not the conduct of a genuine temporary student. Rather, it suggests the applicant has decided to extend his stay in Australia by utilising the student visa programme.
The Tribunal does not place substantial weight on the value of the course to the applicant’s future, including remuneration and career prospects in the applicant’s home country. The applicant gave very vague evidence in that regard. Further, the applicant already holds a diploma of business management, an advanced diploma of accounting, a bachelor of business (accounting) and has completed a professional year of accounting.
The Tribunal has considered the applicant’s study history since arrival and notes that he commenced study in 2008. Since that time he has completed a diploma of business management, a vocational certificate in printing and graphic arts, an advanced diploma in accounting, a bachelor of business (accounting) and a professional year of accounting. The applicant has extensive qualification to enable him to “work in large international companies or government agencies”.
The applicant now wishes to pursue a master of business administration in Australia. The course is asserted to have relevance to very vague future plans.
The Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant has established that study will provide him with significant benefits in his proposed career plan, considering the cost of the study and the extensive qualifications which he already holds. The Tribunal therefore is not satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed additional study has a realistic prospect of providing significant value to his future beyond the qualifications he already holds.
The Tribunal has had regard to whether there are any other relevant matters. The Tribunal finds that there are no other relevant matters to consider that may be beneficial or adverse to the applicant, and that this aspect is not relevant.
The Tribunal has considered all the information provided with the visa application. After weighing up these factors as a whole, the Tribunal finds that the applicant has not been able to satisfy it that the applicant genuinely intends a temporary stay in Australia as a student.
The Tribunal has considered the evidence and has taken into account the applicant’s economic circumstances in his home country relative to his potential circumstances in Australia. Given the disparity in economic circumstances between Bangladesh and Australia the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the applicant has significant incentive to return to Bangladesh. The applicant has been unable to demonstrate substantial ties or personal assets in his home country which diminishes his incentive to return to Bangladesh.
The Tribunal is concerned that the applicant’s intention to live in Australia may be motivated by factors other than study. The applicant has not demonstrated any clear and substantial improvements arising from his proposed study which will outweigh the significant time and monetary commitment this course will require. Therefore the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated the value of his proposed course to his future.
The Tribunal does give weight to the evidence that since the applicant’s arrival in Australia on 2 November 2008 the applicant has spent over 11 years in Australia and has returned to Bangladesh on six occasions for periods between 11 and 31 days which indicates that he does not appear to have strong personal ties to Bangladesh. Based on this evidence the Tribunal assesses the applicant’s incentive to return to Bangladesh to be minimal.
On balance, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine temporary entrant for further stay as a full-time student. Whilst the applicant clearly wishes to stay and continue to study in Australia, it is noted that the applicant was previously granted visas specifically to enable him to achieve that goal. The applicant lodged this application shortly prior to expiry of the most recent visa. It therefore appears to the Tribunal that the applicant has commenced studying for the purposes of the visa application only in order to secure a further stay in Australia, rather than due to a genuine interest in this area of study. The Tribunal has also had regard to whether there is any other relevant matter and finds there to be no other relevant matter to the assessment of the applicant’s intentions to stay in Australia temporarily. The Tribunal has considered all information provided by the applicant in support of his application. On balance, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the information the applicant has provided regarding the applicant’s circumstances in his home 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 the applicant is a genuine temporary entrant.
On the contrary, the factors indicate that the applicant appears to have enrolled in the present course for the purposes of securing a further student visa, rather than due to a genuine interest in study and overall academic progress. The applicant appears to be using the student visa programme as a means of maintaining ongoing residence in Australia, and does not have a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily.
There is no evidence before the Tribunal regarding the following factors indicated by Direction No.69: economic circumstances of the applicant; any potential military service in Bangladesh; political or civil unrest circumstances in Bangladesh; remuneration the applicant could expect to receive in Bangladesh or a third country compared with Australia; circumstances in Bangladesh relative to Australia or any other country; and the applicant’s circumstances in Bangladesh relative to others in that country.
The Tribunal considers that an applicant who is a genuine temporary entrant will have circumstances which support a genuine intention to remain in Australia temporarily, recognising the possibility that this may change over time, to utilise lawful means to remain in Australia. Given the amount of time the applicant has now spent in Australia, the Tribunal is concerned the student visa may be used primarily for maintaining ongoing residence.

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

[2020] AATA 456

18 February 2020

Key Legal Topics

Areas of Law

Immigration

Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

Judicial Review

Procedural Fairness

Statutory Construction