Chanthavady (Migration) - [2025] ARTA 1617

Chanthavady (Migration) [2025] ARTA 1617 (20 August 2025)
DECISION AND
REASONS FOR DECISION
Applicant:Mr Anoulack Chanthavady
Respondent:  Minister for Immigration and Citizenship
Tribunal Number:  2408361

Tribunal:General Member M Hanna
Place:Melbourne
Date: 20 August 2025
Decision:The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and remits the application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa for reconsideration in accordance with the order that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:
·cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 20 August 2025 at 10:16am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine student – applicant transferred to new education provider – good course progress – practical management and business growth techniques for employment in Laos – no personal ties to Australia – close family ties in Laos – daughter in Laos – business in Laos – decision under review remitted
LEGISLATION
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (Cth)
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 499
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cls 500.212, 500.611
STATEMENT OF REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 5 April 2024 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The applicant applied for the visa on 7 October 2023. 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 cl500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations) because the delegate was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student.
On 16 April 2024, the applicant sought a review of that decision from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The applicant provided the AAT with a copy of the delegate’s decision.
On 14 October 2024, the AAT became the Administrative Review Tribunal (the Tribunal). Under the transitional provisions in the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (the Transitional Act), proceedings in the AAT that were not finalised before 14 October 2024 are to be continued and finalised by the Tribunal. Anything done in relation to the proceeding before 14 October 2024 is taken to have been done by the Tribunal.
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal by video on 18 July 2025 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Lao and English languages.
The applicant was self-represented in relation to the review.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and remits the visa application for reconsideration. In reaching this decision, the Tribunal has had regard to:
a.the oral evidence of the applicant given at the hearing;
b.all written material filed by or on behalf of the applicant; and
c.other relevant documents on the Tribunal and Departmental files.
CRITERIA FOR STUDENT VISA
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 applicant for entry and stay as a student.
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 108, ‘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.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
Background
The applicant is a 26-year-old citizen of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Lao PDR) who first travelled to Australia on 22 June 2019 as the holder of a subclass 600 visitor visa (600 visa). He later departed on 7 July 2019 and returned to Australia a second time as the holder of the 600 visa on 25 August 2023. On 7 October 2023, the applicant lodged an onshore application for a student visa in order to undertake studies in Australia. This visa, to which this decision relates, is the applicant’s first student visa application.
The applicant is single, having previously been married and divorced. The applicant has one child of his former marriage who is 8 years of age. The applicant’s daughter lives with her biological mother and maternal grandparents in Lao PDR and the applicant is in frequent contact with his daughter. The Tribunal finds that the applicant has not entered into a relationship of concern for a successful student visa outcome.
By way of educational background in Lao PDR, the applicant completed his secondary school education sometime in June 2016. He did not undertake any further studies having opened his own small business in the form of a coffee and gift shop. He gave evidence that he opened this business together with his former wife but the business closed down after the couple’s divorce and as a result of economic factors. The applicant stated that he did not undertake further studies after completion of his secondary school education as he had become a young father and had wanted to take care of, and provide for his young family. For a period of time, whilst he was running his own small business, he also began working for his sister’s company. The applicant stated that he was employed in his sister’s import/export business as an assistant director during the period of October 2018 – September 2023. He then took a period of leave in order to undertake his studies in Australia. The applicant completed his English language studies during the period of 2 October 2023 – 28 April 2024 before commencing his current Diploma of Business studies.
The applicant’s student visa application which is the subject of this review application concerns his request to remain in Australia for a specified period of time to undertake a package course of studies consisting of:
·English language studies (2 October 2023 – 28 April 2024);
·Diploma of Business (29 April 2024 – 27 April 2025); and
·Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management (28 April 2025 – 26 April 2026).
The Tribunal notes the applicant’s evidence that sometime in December 2024 the applicant’s then education provider was no longer able to continue to offer the above Diploma and Advanced Diploma qualifications as enrolment numbers were insufficient for the provider to be able to continue to offer such courses. Consequently, the applicant was required to transfer his studies to a new education provider. The Tribunal accepts the applicant’s evidence in this regard noting that such evidence is consistent with the applicant’s PRISM’s[1] records. On 8 January 2025, the applicant was issued with new Confirmation of Enrolment’s (CoE’s) in order to undertake the following package course of studies with his new education provider:
·Diploma of Business (10 February 2025 – 19 October 2025); and
·Advanced Diploma of Business (20 October 2025 – 13 December 2026).
[1] Provider Registration and International Student Management System (PRISMS) -
For the following reasons and having considered all the material before it, together with the relevant factors set out in Direction 108, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily as a student.
Firstly, in the time that it has taken for this matter to come before the Tribunal, the applicant has successfully completed his English studies during the period 2 October 2023 – 28 April 2024. He has also completed numerous units of competency towards his Diploma of Business and is on track to complete this qualification by October 2025 noting that there were some delays due to the change of education provider and other circumstances that were beyond the control of the applicant. The applicant has provided evidence of his English language course completion and current course progress from his education provider consistent with his PRISM’s records. The applicant’s progression with his studies indicates that whilst awaiting the outcome of his review application, the applicant has applied himself to his studies, made good course progress and is on schedule to complete his studies as per the updated CoE’s issued. The Tribunal considers this compelling evidence indicative of the applicant being a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student and the Tribunal places weight in favour of the applicant in this regard.
Secondly, the applicant has provided detailed and consistent oral and written evidence as to the value of the courses he has undertaken and is undertaking to his future plans for both employment and entrepreneurial purposes upon his return to Lao PDR. The applicant has provided credible and detailed evidence as to how the proposed package of course he wishes to undertake in Australia will provide value towards his business career in Lao PDR, initially in helping him to grow in his role as an assistant director in his sister’s import export business and later with his own future business initiatives. The applicant provided cogent and convincing evidence that he is seeking practical, skills based training in business and management. He stated that his choice of studies in Australia was in order to develop and enhance his skills in business planning, management and growth as well as the implementation of risk management strategies, improving business performance and decision making skills. He gave evidence that as an assistant director of his sister’s company, it was his role to help expand and grow the business and that with improved English language skills in a global market as well as practical management and business growth techniques, he is then able to communicate and negotiate effectively with local and international business networks and customers in order to grow the business.
When asked about his current studies, the applicant demonstrated detailed understanding of the course content and unit requirements undertaken to date. When asked if such courses were available in his home country, the applicant was forthcoming in his responses that they were, however the courses offered in Lao PDR were very new and still developing. The applicant was able to articulate how the course offerings in Australia were more superior in their teaching methods, knowledge content, practical application and more widely recognised locally and internationally. He stated that such qualifications and skills set would therefore benefit his future in that he would expect to receive more competitive and higher salaries given his overseas qualifications, English language skills and international experience. The Tribunal accepts the applicant’s evidence as to the value of the courses for his future, his reasons for choosing to study such courses in Australia and his reasoning for not undertaking such studies in his home country or region. The Tribunal places weight in favour of the applicant in this regard.
Thirdly, as to the applicants’ circumstances in his home country, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant has significant personal, business and family ties to Lao PDR. His family ties include his parents, stepparents, two half-sisters including his half-sister with whom the applicant has worked for over 5 years in her company and most significantly his 8 year old daughter with whom the applicant maintains a close relationship. The applicant gave evidence that he is very close to his entire family including particularly his half-sister with whom he has worked for over 5 years and that upon return to Lao PDR he intends to live with his mother. The applicant does not have any close family or personal ties to Australia. The Tribunal finds on the evidence before it, that the applicant’s overall circumstances, including his significant personal and familial ties in Lao PDR, provide a strong incentive for him to return to his home country upon completion of his studies
Fourthly, there is no evidence before the Tribunal that the applicant’s economic circumstances would present as a significant incentive for the applicant not to return to Lao PDR. The applicant has provided detailed and comprehensive evidence that the applicant comes from a supportive and affluent family of business owners with his father and step mother owning two businesses, his half-sister a successful business owner and numerous family members having access to and ownership of significant assets. There is also no evidence before the Tribunal that the applicant has any military service commitments that would present as a significant incentive for him not to return to Lao PDR nor is there any evidence before the Tribunal that there is any political or civil unrest in Lao PDR that would result in the applicant choosing to remain in Australia indefinitely.
Finally, as to the applicant’s immigration history, whilst the Tribunal does have some concern that the applicant applied for a student visa after his second arrival in Australia on a visitor visa, on the evidence before it, the Tribunal accepts the applicant’s reasons as to why he chose to do so and notes that there were no conditions on his visitor visa preventing him from doing so. The Tribunal further notes that the applicant does not have an extensive visa history, that this is the applicant’s first student visa application and that, on balance, the applicant’s course completion of his English language studies, his evidence as to his course progression and his detailed knowledge of his Diploma qualification, as well as his compliance with his bridging visa conditions are all indications that the applicant is seeking to undertake his studies for genuine reasons. There is no evidence that the student visa program is being used by the applicant as a means to circumvent the intentions of the migration program nor is there any evidence that such a visa is being used to maintain ongoing residence. However, this factor may need to be reconsidered should the applicant seek to apply for a further student visa/s upon completion of his intended studies, having given direct and explicit evidence to the contrary in this application.
The Tribunal has had regard as to whether there are any other relevant matters in assessing the applicant’s intention to temporarily stay in Australia and finds that there are no other relevant matters in addition to those addressed above.
On the basis of the above, and having considered all of the applicant’s circumstances, his immigration history and all other relevant matters, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student in Australia temporarily as required by cl500.212(a).
Does the applicant intend to comply with visa conditions?
For the applicant to meet cl 500.212(b), the Tribunal must be satisfied that the applicant intends to comply with any conditions subject to which the visa is granted, having regard to the applicant’s record of compliance with any condition of any visa they previously held, and the applicant’s stated intention to comply with any conditions to which the visa may be subject.
A visa granted to an applicant who meets the primary criteria must have the following conditions imposed (cl 500.611(1)): 8105 (work limitation), 8202 (enrolment/course progress/course attendance), 8501 (health insurance), 8516 (continue to satisfy criteria), 8517 (dependents’ education), 8532 (arrangements for under 18s) and 8533 (notify address/education provider). For visa applications made on or after 1 July 2022, condition 8208 (no critical technology related study without approval) must also be imposed.
The applicant has provided with his visa application, an undertaking to comply with any conditions subject to which his visa is granted and there is no evidence before the Tribunal to indicate that this would not be the case. Furthermore, the evidence before the Tribunal is that the applicant has abided by the condition/s of his visas held to date and consequently on the basis of the above, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant intends to comply with the conditions subject to which the visa is granted as required by cl 500.212(b).
Is the applicant a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student because of any other relevant matter?
For the applicant to meet cl 500.212(c), the Tribunal must be satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student because of any other relevant matter (in addition to the requirements in cl 500.212(a) and (b)). There is no other relevant matter to consider. The Tribunal finds the applicant meets cl500.212(c).
Accordingly, the Tribunal is 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 appropriate course is to remit the application for the visa to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa.
DECISION
The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and remits the application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa for reconsideration, in accordance with the order that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:
·cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Dates of hearing(s): 18 July 2025
Attachment – Direction No 108
DIRECTION NUMBER 108 – ASSESSING THE GENUINE TEMPORARY ENTRANT CRITERION FOR STUDENT VISA AND STUDENT GUARDIAN VISA APPLICATIONS
(Section 499)
I, CLARE O’NEIL, Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Cyber Security give this Direction under section 499 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
Dated:
Clare O’Neil

Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Cyber Security
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 - Preliminary
Name of Direction
This Direction is Direction No. 108 – Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa and Student Guardian visa applications.
It may be cited as Direction No. 108.
Commencement
This Direction commences on 23 March 2024.
Revocation
Direction No. 69, given under section 499 of the Act, is revoked.
Interpretation
Act means the Migration Act 1958.
Finally determined has the same meaning as is set out in subsections 5(9) and (9A) of the Act.
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 against the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications and Student Guardian visa applications (as applicable).
This Direction also applies to members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; or the Administrative Review Tribunal, upon its establishment; who review the decisions of primary decision-makers in relation to a Student visa or Student Guardian visa application.
This Direction applies in relation to Student visa applications and Student Guardian visa applications made before 23 March 2024 but not finally determined on that date, including such visa applications that are remitted from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; or the Administrative Review Tribunal, upon its establishment; or a Court.
The genuine temporary entrant criterion must be satisfied by all applicants who make an application for a Student visa and seek to satisfy the primary or secondary criteria, or an application for a Student Guardian visa and seek to satisfy the primary criteria.
Note: Direction No. 106 applies in relation to Subclass 500 (Student) visa applications and Student Guardian visa applications made on or after 23 March 2024, including visa applications made on or after that date that are remitted from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; or the Administrative Review Tribunal, upon its establishment; or a Court.
Preamble
The Australian Government operates a student visa program 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 program 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 – 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 or Student Guardian 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 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;
d)whether 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.
iii.b. Previous travels to Australia or other countries, including:
iv.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;
v.whether the applicant previously held a visa that was cancelled or considered for cancellation, and the associated circumstances;
vi.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
vii.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 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.