Gan (Migration)

The applicant, Mr Gan, sought judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which affirmed the refusal of his application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, subclass 500. The AAT's decision was based on the applicant's failure to satisfy the genuine temporary entrant (GTE) requirement.

The primary legal issue before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was whether the AAT had erred in law by finding that Mr Gan had not demonstrated he was a genuine temporary entrant. Specifically, the court considered whether the AAT had failed to properly consider all relevant evidence, including evidence of the applicant's enrolment status at the time of the AAT's decision.

The court found that the AAT had not erred in law. It noted that while the applicant had provided evidence of his intention to enrol, there was no evidence of actual enrolment at the time the AAT made its decision. The AAT was entitled to conclude that the applicant had not discharged his onus to satisfy the GTE requirement, as the evidence did not demonstrate a genuine intention to study in Australia temporarily. The court applied the principles established in migration law concerning the assessment of the GTE requirement, which necessitates a holistic consideration of all relevant factors.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.