DANG (Migration)

This matter concerned applications for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas, Subclass 500 (Student) visa, made by the first and second named applicants. The dispute centred on whether the first named applicant satisfied the criteria for the visa, specifically clause 500.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which requires an applicant to be enrolled in a course of study at the time of the decision. The decision was made by Mila Foster, a Member of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the first named applicant met the criteria under clause 500.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which mandates enrolment in a course of study at the time of the decision. A secondary issue arose concerning the second named applicant, who sought to satisfy secondary criteria under clause 500.311 as a family unit member, which requires the primary applicant to hold a student visa.

The Tribunal found that the first named applicant was enrolled in a Master of Professional Accounting course provided by Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd, as evidenced by the PRISMS database. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that clause 500.211 was met. However, the second named applicant could not satisfy clause 500.311 at that time because the first named applicant did not yet hold a student visa. The Tribunal concluded that the appropriate course was to remit both applications for reconsideration by the Minister, with a direction that the first named applicant satisfied clause 500.211. The second named applicant's application was remitted on the basis that they might satisfy the secondary criteria upon reconsideration, should the first named applicant be granted a student visa.