BEEJAHDUR (MIGRATION)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an appeal by Mr Beejadhur against a decision to refuse him a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Beejadhur was a "genuine temporary entrant" as required by clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine if Mr Beejadhur genuinely intended to stay in Australia temporarily for the purpose of study, having regard to his circumstances in his home country and in Australia, his immigration history, and any other relevant matters, as guided by Direction No. 69. This involved assessing the value of his chosen course to his future, his reasons for undertaking the selected course, and his plans for after completing his studies.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal noted that Mr Beejadhur had been in Australia on temporary visas for five years, having initially come to study a two-year course. While acknowledging that young people may change their study plans, the Tribunal found that Mr Beejadhur's multiple changes in course of study – from an initial course to a fitness course, then to carpentry, and finally to construction management – were not adequately explained. The Tribunal was not satisfied that these changes were solely due to a young person's indecision, particularly as his stated original intention to study animal courses for a nature trail was not consistently presented. The Tribunal also found that while Mr Beejadhur had some ongoing employment as a carpenter, these ties to the Australian community were not significant.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Mr Beejadhur had not satisfied the criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa, specifically the genuine temporary entrant requirement. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the refusal of the visa was upheld.