CHOTPINYOKUL (Migration)

[2021] AATA 2478

CHOTPINYOKUL (Migration) [2021] AATA 2478 (8 July 2021)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr KANET CHOTPINYOKUL

CASE NUMBER:  1931813

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2019/4726737

MEMBER:Warren Stooke AM

DATE:8 July 2021

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.

Statement made on 8 July 2021 at 10:32am

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine temporary entrant – visa history as primary holder and dependant – long residence, low-level courses in different subject areas with long gaps, and not studying while working and supporting partner – end of relationship and return to study – undetailed future work plans – no strong ties to home country – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65

Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 500.212(a)

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 22 October 2019 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 20 September 2019. 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.

3. 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 the delegate was not satisfied that the applicant, given the gap in studies, the lack of evidence as to his business in his home country and failure to demonstrate strong ties to his home country, the delegate considered the applicant would not return to his home country at the conclusion of his studies.

4. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 27 May 2021 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Thai and English languages.

5. The applicant provided the Tribunal with a copy of the delegate’s decision prior to hearing and confirmed to the Tribunal that he had read the decision. In this regard, the applicant stated that the Immigration Department refused the application because they did not believe he was here to study genuinely.

6. The applicant was assisted in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.

7. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

8. 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 applicant for entry and stay as a student.

9. At the commencement of the hearing the Tribunal asked the applicant:

   “Do you understand that to be granted a Temporary Student Visa, it is a requirement that you satisfy the Minister that you are a genuine temporary student?”

10. In response to the Tribunal’s question regarding the requirement to be a genuine temporary entrant, the applicant stated: “Yes”.

11. The applicant is a 35 year old from Thailand, who stated in evidence that he arrived in Australia on 24 January 2010 and has held visas as a student and as a dependent whilst resident in Australia.

12. The applicant confirmed in evidence that he has held the following visas:

    a.Student visa subclass 572 in 2010

    b.Student visa subclass 572 in 2012

    c.Student visa subclass 572 (Dependant) in 2013

    d.Student visa subclass 572 (Dependant) in 2015

    e.Student visa subclass 500 (Dependant) in 2018.

13. Further, the applicant was granted a Bridging Visa A on 20 September 2019, which has work limitation 8104.

14. The applicant provided evidence that he has health insurance, which is valid from 16 March 2015 to 15 March 2022.

15. The applicant provided evidence that he completed an IELTS English language test on 30 August 2019 with an overall score of 6.0.

16. The applicant provided a transcript from Silpakorn University that stated the applicant completed a Bachelor of Food Technology on 29 October 2009.

17. The applicant confirmed at hearing that he was no longer a partner to the former visa holder upon whom he was a dependent.

18. The applicant confirmed that he has completed the following courses of study in the more than 11 years that he has been resident in Australia, as a dependent or student:

    a.English for Academic Purpose in 2010;

    b.Diploma of Tourism in 2012;

    c.Certificate III in Business in 2013;

    d.Certificate IV in Commercial Cookery from 2 December 2019 to 18 June 2021;

    e.Diploma of Hospitality Management from 19 July 2021 to 10 December 2021.

19. The Tribunal asked the applicant to explain that after 8 years in Australia, why was he now undertaking a Commercial Cookery course. The applicant responded that at the time in 2013, when he met his partner, he was supporting the relationship through physical, mental and financial means. He also claimed, that at the time, he claimed he was thinking of study, was working 40 hours per fortnight, and undertaking self study.

20. The applicant stated that he was fully supporting his ex-partner for the eight years until she left to return to Thailand in 2019.

21. The applicant provided evidence that he applied for a study visa and has been studying since 2 December 2019.

22. The Tribunal ask the applicant when he had returned to Thailand and he confirmed the following information:

    a.07/2010 - 11 days Visited my family and attended Bachelor graduate ceremony;

    b.08/2012 - 34 days Visited my family and friends;

    c.07/2013 - 25 days Visited my family;

    d.11/2015 - 40 days Visited my family;

    e.10/2016 - 40 days Visited my family;

    f.05/2017 - 38 days Visited my family.

23. The applicant provided evidence that he has not returned to Thailand since May 2017.

24. The applicant provided evidence that he has been working as a casual and part-time and that he knew he could study, but because of the circumstances at the time, he did not go back to study.

25. At this juncture, the Tribunal put to the applicant that to be a GTE do you understand you have to study. The applicant responded: “I do Member”.

26. The applicant provided the following information in his response to the Tribunal’s s359(2) request for information concerning work and earnings:

    a.ATOM THAI RESTAURANT Part time staff from 06/2010 to 03/2012

    b.MAGGIE's THAI RESTAURANT Part time staff from 05/2012 to 05/2013

    c.WELLC O All Rounder Part Time Staff from 01/2014 to 01/2016

    d.Bar Sirocco Cafe All Rounder Part Time Staff from 02/2016 to 09/2017

    e.The End of King All Rounder Part Time Staff from 10/2017 to 01/2018

    f.ZETLAND Hotel Commis Chef from 02/2018 to 03/2021

27. The applicant stated that at the moment he is focussed on his qualifications for his work and would be pleased to find a job in cooking as a Chef in hotels or restaurants.

28. The applicant provided evidence that he has a goal to “collect experience and knowledge for the future plan of business”.

29. The applicant provided evidence that he has family in Thailand, whom he last saw in June 2017, that includes:

    a.Stith CHOTIPINYOKUL Parent Thailand

    b.Rattana CHOTIPINYOKUL Parent Thailand

    c.Kalaya CHUTITIN Foster Mother Thailand

    d.Narit CHOTIPINYOKUL Brother Thailand

    e.Pachara CHOTPINYOKUL Sister Thailand

    f.Narisa CHOTIPINYOKUL Sister Thailand

    g.Prawet CHOTIPINYOKUL Brother Thailand

30. The applicant stated that his father owns a business and has his own store for the monks and the temple.

31. The Tribunal asked the applicant what ties does he have in Australia and he responded: “Donot ties in Australia”. The applicant also stated that he rents a room and lives by himself.

32. The Tribunal asked the applicant, if he would have any difficulty assimilating back into Thailand and he responded: “Personally, no Member. No problem after I finish my studies”.

33. The Tribunal asked the applicant if there was any reason that would preclude the applicant from returning to his home country and he responded: “My concern would be the current situation with Covid in Thailand”.

34. The Tribunal asked the applicant if he had a business plan for when he returns to Thailand and the applicant stated: “I have talked about it as a long-term business plan - actual plan, no. But discussion and agreement – talked about location with adopted mother”.

35. The Tribunal asked the applicant if it was his motivation to remain in Australia permanently and the applicant responded: “I have no intention to stay here permanently”.

36. The former partner of the applicant provided the Tribunal with a statement that confirmed that she met the applicant in an English class in 2010 and the relationship ended in 2020. She also, stated that the applicant was interested in cooking and wanted to expand his knowledge.

37. The applicant provided the Tribunal with a statement concerning his background in Thailand that included he finished university and had never worked and decided to travel to Australia for 3 months. The statement included that his work in a Thai restaurant generated interest in commercial cookery and he has continued to work in hospitality. He stated that his former partner encouraged this occupation.

38. The applicant also provided the following statement in his written submission:

    “Furthermore, graduates with a degree in hospitality in Australia are amongst the highly preferred applicants by the industry, assuring its graduates of competitive advantage. Having a globally recognized Australian education allows me to open my wings to explore the world with confidence to fulfill my career goals as the first step is to work for Michelln star restaurants or Grand Hotel or worldwide restaurants in Thailand Such as Anantara Hotel or Wine Connections or Mezzaluna after completed study, I believe that skills, knowledge and experiences from SBTA – Australian institution will be the significant advantage for me over other Thai locally educated.

    • To gain knowledge and experience from the reputation restaurant for a few years

    • To be a head chef who can run the kitchen smoothly, even during peak times and create my own dishes. Gain respect and reputation from colleagues and customers.

    • To have my own restaurant in Thailand with 8-10 or more years experiences with confidence and reputation.

    • To look after my foster mother ( 80 years old and no kid) and parents (both 67 years old) , they are old and they should be relax and retired. They raised me up and look after me well until now. I definitely take care of them.

    Michelin star chef in Thailand salary is around 60,000 which is above the average ( 52,000)”

    Genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student (cl.500.212)

39. 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?

40. 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.

41. 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.

42. The Tribunal has considered the evidence, provided by the applicant, in the context of Direction 69, and finds that the applicant is not a genuine temporary entrant for the following reasons:

    a.The applicant came to Australia, with the status of a University graduate from the Silkorn University in Thailand and has spent more than 11 years in Australia on either a student or dependent visa, where he has pursued courses in the ‘low level’ VET sector, which provides short duration and low-cost tuition. Whilst an individual can change courses and career direction, the applicant has transitioned from English to Tourism, to Business, to Commercial Cookery and Hospitality Management, which supports the Tribunal’s finding that the rationale for the choice of studies has been cost and with courses of limited duration, where credits accumulate and allow time to pursue the allowable employment and earnings access opportunity through Australian residency. As such, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student;

    b.The applicant has demonstrated that he has had long breaks between periods of study, where the evidence shows that he undertook no completed courses of study between 2013 and when he commenced study in December 2019. As such, the Tribunal finds that the applicant did not take advantage of access to study opportunities for 6 years, when he was on a dependent visa, however he chose to work during that time to maintain his lifestyle in Australia with his then partner;

    c.Whilst the Tribunal accepts that individuals can choose to further educate themselves in order to improve their career and remuneration prospects, the applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated how the courses chosen will achieve that gaol, especially given that the applicant will have expended more than 11 years in the Australian, and that he has only partially spent time in the education sector, before returning to his home country. In this regard, the Tribunal finds that the applicant, at 35 years of age and despite his prior qualifications at the Bachelor level in Food Technology, has not engaged in work in his home country to pursue an identified concrete career, after an extended period of 11 years of temporary residence, for which the Australian education program was not intended;

    d.Despite the explanations provided by the applicant, regarding the value of the cookery and hospitality courses, the Tribunal is not convinced as to the value of the proposed commercial cookery and hospitality courses, given that the applicant has no concrete business plan and his explanation lacks specificity of any identification of potential job opportunities. To assert that one wishes to become a Michelin Chef is aspirational, however, the evidence of job offers, or a concrete business plan, have not been provided to the Tribunal. In this regard, the applicant confirmed to the Tribunal in evidence that he has no actual business plan regarding the proposed restaurant he intends to open other than a general discussion with his foster mother and previous intentions that his now separated partner’s family may provide financial support;

    e.The Tribunal gives weight to the lack of apparent value of the courses to the applicant’s future, as the study at the Certificate and Diploma level is inferior to his prior bachelor studies in food technology in his home country, which indicates that the applicant does not genuinely intend to stay in Australia temporarily and is using the student visa program as a means of maintaining residency and lifestyle in Australia, particularly given that the applicant has spent more than 11 years in Australia on temporary visas and has not returned to Thailand in more than 4 years. This demonstrates to the Tribunal that the applicant has not maintained strong ties with his home country.

43. Overall the Tribunal finds that the applicant is not a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student and that the principal purpose is to maintain residency and lifestyle in Australia. In this regard, the applicant has not produced any meaningful evidence to support an ongoing strong relationship with his family or home country over the last 4 years. The applicant’s continuing residence in Australia leads the Tribunal to conclude that the applicant has developed stronger ties with Australia than with his home country.

44. Further, there is no evidence before the Tribunal that would suggest that the applicant has any reason not to return to Thailand or a third country; and that to the contrary, there is every indication that the applicant has developed a desire to remain in Australia for the purposes of residency and the lifestyle. As such, the Tribunal is satisfied upon the review of the criteria pertaining to Direction 69 that there is no further material before the Tribunal to be considered that would materially outweigh the findings of the Tribunal that the applicant is not a genuine temporary entrant for stay as a student.

45. On the basis of the above, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. Accordingly, the applicant does not meet cl.500.212(a).

46. Accordingly, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl.500.212.

47. Given the above findings, the Tribunal finds that the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 500 (Student) visa are not met. The applicant does not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa. Accordingly, the decision under review must be affirmed.

    DECISION

48. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.

    Warren Stooke AM
    Member

    
    

    Attachment – Direction No.69

    DIRECTION 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 2016

    Peter Dutton

    
    

    Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

    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 of Direction No. 69 - Preliminary

    Name of Direction

    This 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.

    Commencement

    This Direction commences on 1 July 2016.

    Interpretation

    Act 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) 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’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.

    Preamble

    The 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; 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 of Direction No. 69 - 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.

    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 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 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;

    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; 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.

    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; and

    iv.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 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 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.