Azizi (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) reviewed a decision not to grant an Albanian national, who held Italian citizenship, a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, subclass 572 (Vocational Education and Training Sector visa). The applicant, who had been in Australia since September 2014, sought to undertake further business studies after previously completing vocational qualifications in painting and business. The delegate had not been satisfied that the applicant was a genuine student, noting a lack of prior study, unclear career aspirations, and the availability of comparable courses in Italy at a lower cost.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, specifically concerning the genuineness of his intention to study and his future intentions. The Tribunal was required to consider whether the applicant's proposed course of study and his overall circumstances demonstrated a genuine intention to study in Australia and then return to his home country.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the applicant did not meet an essential requirement of clause 572.223 of the Migration Regulations 1994. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine student. This conclusion was based on several factors, including the applicant's age, his lack of prior academic pursuits after high school, and the fact that he had not provided sufficient detail regarding his future employment prospects or the necessity of obtaining an Australian qualification for his intended career path. The Tribunal also noted that the proposed studies were available in Italy and that the applicant had not demonstrated a genuine intention to return to Italy, particularly given his prolonged stay in Australia and his engagement in employment rather than study. The Tribunal further observed that the applicant had not sought sponsorship for other visa programs, which might have been an avenue if his primary intention was to remain in Australia. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.