DECISION:The Tribunal remits the applications for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:
·cl.500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Statement made on 26 April 2020 at 5:45 pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine temporary entrant as student – graduate applicant studying Vocational courses – applicant’s family and community ties to his home country – relative esteem of trade qualifications in Sri Lanka – change of career path – plans to establish trade business – decision under review remitted
This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 9 May 2018 to refuse to grant the applicants Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
The applicants applied for the visas on 15 March 2018. At the time of application, Class TU contained two subclasses: Subclass 500 (Student) and Subclass 590 (Student Guardian). The primary visa applicant (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 visas 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 she was not satisfied that the applicant intended genuinely to stay temporarily in Australia..
The applicants appeared before the Tribunal on 24 July 2019 to give evidence and present arguments.
The applicants were assisted in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.
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 meets the requirements of cl.500.212.
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…
Grounds of appeal
[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.
[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.
[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.
Consideration
[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.
[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.
Continue reading Bandara (Migration)
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Bandara (Migration) [2020] AATA 2889
Case
[2020] AATA 2889
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision to refuse a Subclass 500 (Student) visa to the applicants, who are citizens of Sri Lanka. The primary applicant had previously obtained a Bachelor of Business Administration and worked as an accountant. He arrived in Australia as a dependant on his wife's visa and subsequently applied for a student visa to undertake vocational training in the building trades. The delegate refused this application, leading to the review by the Tribunal.
The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay in Australia temporarily, as required by clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. This assessment required consideration of the applicant's circumstances in Sri Lanka and Australia, his immigration history, and any other relevant matters, guided by Direction No. 69. The Tribunal was tasked with determining if the applicant's proposed studies in painting and decorating and wall and floor tiling were consistent with a genuine intention to return to Sri Lanka.
The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant's proposed vocational studies had real value for his future in Sri Lanka, particularly in light of an offer of employment as a team leader from a Sri Lankan construction company, which specifically referenced a potential Diploma of Leadership and Management qualification. The Tribunal found that the applicant had diligently pursued his studies, and a temporary cancellation of his initial course due to college registration issues did not cast doubt on his bona fides. Considering the applicant's overall circumstances, including his family and community ties to Sri Lanka and the potential for career advancement there, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the genuine temporary entrant criterion.
Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the visa applications of both applicants to the Minister for reconsideration, with a direction that the primary applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant criterion.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
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.Background The applicants are citizens of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. Before coming to Australia, the applicant obtained a Bachelor of Business Administration and a professional Certificate in Business Accounting and worked as an accountant. He gave evidence at hearing that he first arrived in Australia on 20 February 2017, as a dependant on his wife’s subclass VC-485 Skilled –Graduate (Temporary) visa. His wife’s VC-485 visa was valid until May 2018. On 15 March 2018 the applicants applied for subclass TU-500 student visas so that the applicant could undertake studies in the building trades (specifically, painting and decorating and wall and floor tiling). That visa application was refused, and the applicants have applied to the Tribunal for a review of that decision. Apart from his oral evidence at hearing, the applicant provided a quantity of documentary evidence to the Tribunal. The Tribunal has considered all of those documents. They are not all relevant to the issues before the Tribunal. To the extent that they are relevant, they are as follows:a.the delegate’s decision record dated 9 May 2018;b.a completed Request for Student Visa Information form, provided in response to a request made by the Tribunal pursuant to s.359(2) of the Act;c.a confirmation of the applicant’s account balance dated 3 June 2019 and issued by Sampath Bank LLC, a Sri Lankan bank;d.a vehicle inspection and valuation report dated 28 May 2019 and issued by De Silva Auto Care of Ratnapura, Sri Lanka, in respect of a Suzuki Alto LXI 880 motor car;e.an extract from the applicant’s father’s entry in the Sri Lankan Register of Births;f.the applicant’s birth certificate;g.three deeds of transfer of lands in Sri Lanka to Keerthi Munasinghe dated 30 September 2011, 22 June 1999, and 16 January 2013;h.an agreement for a lease of premises at 77 Tissa Road, Hambantota, Sri Lanka between Keerthi Munasinghe and Union Assurance PLC dated 8 April 2014;i.a deed of gift of real property at Moratumulla, District of Colombo, Sri Lanka made on or about 29 March 2005 by Munasinghe Gunadasa in favour of Keerthi Munasinghe;j.two Sri Lankan certificates of registration of motor vehicles in the name of Keerthi Munasinghe dated 10 October 2014 and 12 June 2019 respectively;k.the birth certificate of Keerthi Munasinghe;l.the birth certificate of Manasha Sahindi Munasinghe, the second applicant in this review application, stating Keerthi Munasinghe as her father;m.a Certificate in Business Accounting issued dated 2008 and issued in respect of the applicant by the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants;n.a degree certificate dated 9 May 2014 issued by the University of Ruhana, Sri Lanka, recording conferral of the degree of Bachelor of Business Administration on the applicant;o.a Faculty of Management and Finance, University of Ruhana, Internship Record Book issued to the applicant and containing entries by various persons made on various dates between May and August 2013;p.a membership certificate dated 31 May 2019 issued by the St Aloysius College2006-2010 Old Boys Association, certifying the applicant’s membership and containing a testimonial as to his activities for the association;q.an email dated 19 February 2019 from Perth College of Business and Technology (PCBT) to the applicant regarding issues with the registration of its Certificate III in Painting and Decorating course and changes to enrolments resulting from them;r.a statement of attainment issued by PCBT and dated 7 April 2019 in respect of components of the applicant’s Certificate III in Painting and Decorating course;s.a letter of attendance from PCBT in respect of the applicant, dated 29 May 2019;t.a set of tax invoices dated 10 April 2018, 3 August 2018, and 31 March 2019 issued by PBCT to the applicant for fees and other charges in relation to the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating and Certificate III in Wall and Floor Tiling courses, showing payment of all such fees and charges;u.a PBCT transactions ledger in respect of the applicant printed on 29 May 2019;v.a letter dated 19 April 2017 from Pangulf Shipping & Logistics LLC (Pangulf), of Dubai in the UAE, regarding the applicant’s employment by that company;w.a letter dated 13 July 2016 from Pangulf to the applicant regarding his salary and other benefits for work with that company;x.extracts from the applicant’s mobile telephone accounts for the period 3 January 2019 to 2 May 2019;y.the applicants’ marriage certificate dated 5 January 2017;z.a statement of purpose made by the applicant dated 4 June 2019;aa.Confirmation of Enrolment (CoE) A7915B72, in respect of the applicant’s enrolment in a Certificate III in Wall and Floor Tiling course offered by PCBT between 22 March 2019 and 1 May 2020;bb.CoE 988DD620, in respect of the applicant’s enrolment in a Certificate III in Painting and Decorating course offered by PCBT between 2 May 2018 and 1 March 2020;cc.copies of online articles from 2019 and 2020 regarding the state of the construction industry in Sri Lanka;dd.a statement of attainment dated 11 March 2020 and issued by PCBT regarding the applicant’s completion of components of his Certificate III in Wall and Floor Tiling;ee.a PBCT transactions ledger in respect of the applicant printed on 11 March 2020;ff.a letter from PCBT dated 11 March 2020 confirming the applicant’s enrolment in Certificate III in Wall and Floor Tiling;gg.a letter to the applicant dated 11 March 2020 from PCBT offering him a place in Diploma of Leadership and Management course, to be offered from 8 June 2020 to 7 June 2021; hh.a letter to the applicant from Achira Builders (Pvt) Ltd dated 25 February 2020 offering him employment as a team leader on his return to Sri Lanka after his studies in Australia have been completed; andii.a letter from the Commonwealth Bank of Australia dated 4 June 2019 confirming the applicant’s bank account details and stating his bank balance.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.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 meets the requirements of cl.500.212.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.Background The applicants are citizens of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. Before coming to Australia, the applicant obtained a Bachelor of Business Administration and a professional Certificate in Business Accounting and worked as an accountant. He gave evidence at hearing that he first arrived in Australia on 20 February 2017, as a dependant on his wife’s subclass VC-485 Skilled –Graduate (Temporary) visa. His wife’s VC-485 visa was valid until May 2018. On 15 March 2018 the applicants applied for subclass TU-500 student visas so that the applicant could undertake studies in the building trades (specifically, painting and decorating and wall and floor tiling). That visa application was refused, and the applicants have applied to the Tribunal for a review of that decision.
Decision
Reasons for decision
The second applicant’s visa application was refused on the basis that she did not meet the requirements of cl.500.311 of Schedule 2 of the Regulations, because the applicant had not met the requirements of cl.500.212. Given the above findings, the appropriate course is to remit the visa applications of both of the applicants to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa.DECISION The Tribunal remits the applications for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:·cl.500212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.David ThompsonMemberAttachment – Direction No.69DIRECTION 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 2016Peter DuttonMinister for Immigration and Border ProtectionNote: 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 - PreliminaryName of DirectionThis 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.CommencementThis Direction commences on 1 July 2016.InterpretationAct 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) visaStudent Guardian visa means a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa.ApplicationThis 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.PreambleThe 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; andb.the applicant’s immigration history; andc.if the applicant is a minor — the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant; andd.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 temporarilyPart 2 of Direction No. 69 - DirectionsAssessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion1.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; andb.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; andd.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 circumstances6.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 country9.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; ande.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 Australia11.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; ande.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 future12.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; andb.relevance of the course to the student’s past or proposed future employment either in their home country or a third country; andc.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 history13.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; andii.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; andiv.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-complianceIf the applicant is a minor— the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant15.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 matters16.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.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
The Tribunal finds that the applicant’s studies have a real value for his future in his home country, and that this weighs in favour of his claim to be a genuine temporary entrant.The applicant’s immigration history The applicant’s evidence at hearing was that apart from Australia, he has also travelled to and lived in the United Arab Emirates (specifically, Dubai). There is no evidence before the Tribunal suggesting that he has ever been refused a visa to enter the United Arab Emirates, or has had a visa cancelled either by that country or Australia. There is no evidence before the Tribunal suggesting that the applicant has breached conditions placed on any visa he has held. The applicant has resided in Australia for a little over 3 years at the date of this decision. For the first year and three months (approximately) of that time he was a dependant on his wife’s visa. The evidence before the Tribunal shows that he has studied continuously since 2 May 2018. The Tribunal does not consider that either the length of the applicant’s stay in Australia to date or the amount of time he has spent studying in itself indicates an intention to maintain residence in Australia. Nor does the circumstance that the applicant was previously resident in Australia as a dependant on his wife’s visa, and has now applied for his own visa. It is necessary, however, to consider these matters in the context of the applicant’s record of studies. That record, as revealed by the applicant’s PRISMS record and his evidence at hearing, is as follows:a.2 May 2018 – 1 March 2020: applicant was enrolled in a Certificate III in Painting and Decorating. His CoE for this course was cancelled on 22 March 2019.b.22 March 2019 to 1 May 2020: applicant has been studying for a Certificate III in Wall and Floor Tiling. The cancellation mentioned in paragraph 33(a) above was put to the applicant pursuant to s.359AA of the Act. The applicant explained that due to registration issues his college, PCBT, had to terminate the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating, and offered course participants enrolment in the Certificate III in Wall and Floor Tiling instead. The applicant has provided documentary evidence (see paragraph 12(q) above) confirming this. The Tribunal does not find that the cancellation in question casts any doubt on the applicant’s bona fides as a student. The applicant has recently informed the Tribunal that he is considering enrolling in Diploma of Leadership and Management at PCBT that would run from 8 June 2020 to 7 June 2021. He has also provided the Tribunal with a copy of an offer of employment as a Team Leader from a Sri Lankan company known as Achira Builders (Pvt) Ltd (see paragraphs 12(gg) and (hh) above). That offer makes special reference to the Leadership and Management qualification the applicant is considering pursuing. In view of that fact, and given that on the evidence before the Tribunal the applicant has assiduously attended to his studies, the Tribunal does not find that the possibility of the applicant seeking to undertake further studies in Australia indicates an intention to maintain residence in this country, or an intention to stay in this country after that course is finished.