Bastola Pathak (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by a delegate not to grant the applicant a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The applicant had failed to provide requested information, and the delegate had determined that the genuine temporary entrant criterion was not met, and that the applicant was not currently enrolled in a course of study.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied the criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa, specifically whether the applicant was enrolled in a course of study as required by clause 500.211(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's obligation to provide sufficient information to enable the Tribunal to establish the relevant facts.

The Tribunal noted that while the applicant had provided expired Confirmation of Enrolment (COE) documents, they had also advised that they did not currently possess a COE. Crucially, the Tribunal did not have before it recent evidence of the applicant's present enrolment in a course of study. The Tribunal reiterated that it is for the applicant to satisfy the Tribunal that the requirements of the Act and Regulations have been met, and that the applicant must supply the relevant facts in sufficient detail.

As the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was presently enrolled in a course of study, it affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the visa.