Chen (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The applicant, a 24-year-old from China, sought to study Diploma and Advanced Diploma courses in Leadership and Management in Australia. The Tribunal's decision was to affirm the original decision not to grant the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a genuine temporary entrant under clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This involved assessing whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay in Australia temporarily, considering their circumstances, immigration history, and any other relevant matters, and whether they intended to comply with visa conditions. The Tribunal also had regard to Direction No. 69, which provides guidance on assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for student visas.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on several factors that cast doubt on the applicant's genuine temporary entrant status. Despite claiming a Diploma level qualification in Law, no evidence was provided to substantiate this, beyond completion of secondary schooling. An undated letter from Mercury Institute Victoria, stating the applicant had a Graduation Certificate by Senior High Schools of Shandong Province and a "good test result" in English, lacked supporting documentation. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the applicant had not provided evidence of completing any courses or sustaining enrolment at Mercury Institute Victoria, despite requests. The applicant's stated intention to use the Australian education to advance his father's business in China and his desire for practical learning over theory were considered, as was his plan to return to China and seek employment. However, the lack of evidence regarding his academic background and enrolment, coupled with the nature of the proposed short, inexpensive courses at VET level, were inconsistent with his claimed educational background and future aspirations.

Ultimately, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. Consequently, the decision under review was affirmed.