Gjoni (Migration) - [2025] ARTA 527

GJONI (MIGRATION) [2025] ARTA 527 (24 JANUARY 2025)
DECISION AND
REASONS FOR DECISION
Applicant:Ms Lule Gjoni
Respondent:  Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
Tribunal Number:  2306195

Tribunal:Wendy Banfield
Place:Canberra
Date: 24 January 2025
Decision:The decision under review is affirmed.

Statement made on 24 January 2025 at 2:35pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) – genuine temporary entrant – citizen of third country with residency and work rights in Europe – arrived on visitor visa – previous application refused – former husband and visa holder teenage children in Australia, and extended family and community in third country – no employment background and no evidence of property or assets provided – length of stay and general intention to work in Australia, which visa would permit – decision under review affirmed
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 46(1A), 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 590.215, Schedule 8, cl 8534
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 14 April 2023 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student Guardian (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The applicant applied for the visa on 17 March 2023. At the time of application, Class TU contained two subclasses: Subclass 500 (Student) and Subclass 590 (Student Guardian).
The delegate in this case refused to grant the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements of cl 590.215 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations) because they were not satisfied the applicant meets the criteria of a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student guardian.
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 3 October 2024 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Italian and English languages.
The applicant was assisted in relation to the review. The representative attended the Tribunal hearing.
Prior to the hearing the applicant submitted the following evidence:
Department of Home Affairs (the Department) notification and decision record dated 14 April 2023.
·Representative’s submission dated 26 September 2024.
·Applicant’s written statement dated 26 September 2024.
·Statement of Francesk Gjoni dated 26 September 2024.
·Visa grant notice of Blerta Gjoni dated 1 June 2023.
·Visa grant notice of Luigj Gjoni dated 1 June 2023.
·Confirmation of Enrolment (COE) for Luigj Gjoni for Junior Secondary Studies from 30/01/2023 to 11/12/2026.
·COE for Luigj Gjoni for Senior Secondary Certificate of Education from 27/01/2027 to 01/12/2028.
The applicant submitted evidence to the Department at the time of application which has been considered in the Tribunal’s assessment of the application for review.
The hearing
The applicant confirmed she first arrived in Australia as a visitor. She stated she applied for her children to study in Australia for them to be able to speak English and to have a better future. It was confirmed the children are current enrolled and studying at school. Her daughter is 17 years old, and her son is 14. The applicant stated they like to study, but she is not sure what they will do afterwards as they have not decided. They will decide when they are 18 but until then, the applicant decides for them. The children live with the applicant in Australia. The applicant advised she is divorced and not currently in a relationship. The applicant was asked about any family in Italy. She said she has her brother, sister, and mother there, then advised they have Italian passports and property there.
The Tribunal asked how long the applicant plans to remain in Australia. She said until her children turn 18. Regarding her means of support in Australia, the applicant said she gets help from her ex-husband, she has money set aside, and her children are beginning to do some work. The applicant herself does not have work rights but said she would like to work. The applicant stated she has not returned to Italy since she arrived in Australia. The applicant submitted she will return to Italy because she has her life there and does not have any problems. She claimed to have property in Italy and had worked in a hotel previously.
The Tribunal put to the applicant that the Department delegate found she had not provided any evidence of ongoing ties to Italy, and that most of her family at the time were in Albania. The applicant claimed all her family live in “Europe”. She was asked if it was her submission that she has a parent and siblings in Italy and she replied “yes”.
The Tribunal asked the applicant why she had not provided a genuine temporary entrant statement to the Department, as found in the delegate’s decision record. The applicant said she provided what she had. It was put to her that according to the Department’s decision, she indicated in her application that she had been refused a visa in the past but did not provide any details. The applicant’s representative submitted it was an administrative error and the Department refused the application without first requesting the information.
The applicant was asked about her “change of circumstances” that led her to make a new visa application following the refusal of her first visa applicant which was the subject of court proceedings. The applicant said it was to be with her children while they are studying because they are adolescents, and she does not want to leave them alone.
The applicant’s representative made submissions at the hearing. Regarding the applicant’s change of circumstances, he advised that the enrolment certificates provided with the initial student visa applications in 2018 had been completed and the review was targeted at enrolment details that were no longer current. Rather than face delays in the courts and possibly before the Tribunal in the event of a remittal, it was decided to lodge applications based on updated enrolment details. The representative further submitted that while the applicant had expressed a keenness to work, it is not a primary consideration and is not an indication she would breach any visa conditions.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal considers the decision under review should be affirmed.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
The criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa are set out in Part 500 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The issue in the present case is whether the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student guardian, and whether the applicant intends to stay in Australia temporarily.
Clause 590.215 requires as follows:
The applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student guardian 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)any other relevant matter; and
(b)the applicant intends to comply with any conditions to which the visa may be subject, 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 590.215 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 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;
·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.
Assessment
The applicant’s circumstances
The applicant claims she applied for a Student Guardian visa to take care of her children while they study in Australia, which she has been doing since 2018. She declared she and her former husband agree that studying in Australia is good for them. The applicant’s daughter is currently 17 and her son is 14. The applicant submitted that as an Italian citizen she can live and work anywhere in Europe, and she plans to return to Italy when her children are 18 or they finish studying. The applicant states she is not eligible to apply for a permanent visa in Australia and is not eligible for a protection visa, or a Subclass 485 visa.
The Tribunal considered the applicant’s circumstances in her home country. The applicant was born in Albania but is a citizen of Italy. Her children were born in Italy, and they were living there before travelling to Australia as visitors. The applicant’s former husband was in Australia as a student when the applicant and her children arrived. The applicant’s evidence is that she has not worked since her children were born and has always been supported by her former husband. At the Tribunal hearing the applicant was asked about any family members in Italy. She referred to a parent and siblings living there, however, she also stated they live in “Europe” but have Italian passports.
The applicant claimed in her evidence at the Tribunal hearing that she has property in Italy. She did not provide any details or submit any independent evidence in support of this claim. In her written statement dated 26 September 2024 the applicant declared that apart from her children, all her connections are in Europe. The applicant did not elaborate on this or give details about ongoing ties to Europe other than the presence of her mother and siblings and an unsupported claim that she owns property. The Tribunal accepts the applicant has ongoing personal ties to her home country due to the presence of extended family members. However, she does not have an employment background since her children were born, and no evidence was provided of property or assets, or any economic ties to Italy, or elsewhere in Europe. The applicant has been living in Australia, away from her home country and other family members for nearly seven years as of the date of this decision. The Tribunal is not satisfied the applicant will return to her home country after her children turn 18 as claimed due to ongoing ties to Italy or to Europe, or because she has a right to live and work there.
The applicant is living in Australia with her two children who are currently secondary school students. The children have been granted student visas. The evidence is that the applicant is divorced from her former husband, the father of the children and he is pursuing a partner visa based on a new relationship. Both the applicant and her former spouse live in South Australia. According to written statements of the applicant and her former husband dated 26 September 2024, the applicant resides at an address in Payneham in South Australia and her former husband in Campbelltown. In the Application for a Student Guardian Visa dated 17 March 2023 the applicant gave the same address in Campbelltown as her former husband for herself and her children, even though her relationship status is recorded in the application as “divorced”. The current addresses of the applicant and her former husband indicate they now live a short distance apart, approximately four and a half kilometres.
The applicant’s former husband stated in his written submission that he works full time and is not able to look after the children. He declared he continues to financially support the applicant while she cares for the children and pays all their living expenses and school fees. The evidence indicates the applicant’s children are now teenagers with the oldest soon to be an adult. Given the applicant recorded her children’s residential address as being the same as their father in her visa application, and he continues to support them fully financially, it is clear they have continued a close relationship with him. It may be that the children’s father needs to make some after school arrangements for his children if he is employed full-time, but the Tribunal is not satisfied it is necessary for the applicant to remain in Australia as the guardian of the children when their father is onshore.
Representative’s submission
The applicant’s representative submitted any comparison of an applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia and their incentives to remain versus their incentives to depart Australia to their home country must be undertaken within the practical and legal limitations of the Migration framework. It was claimed that just because an applicant may have an incentive to remain in Australia does not mean that this is possible or practicable. The Tribunal considered the representative’s submission. However, the Tribunal is required to assess the applicant’s intentions in the context of the current Student Guardian visa application and determine whether the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student guardian.
The representative set out the conditions to which a Subclass 590 visa would be subject if granted. Due to the applicant’s personal circumstances, it was claimed condition 8534 (which prevents the holder from being granted any substantive visa, other than a Protection visa, a subclass 485 (temporary graduate) visa, or a further subclass 590 visa while the holder remains in Australia) and s.46(1A) of the Act means there is no possibility for Ms Gjoni to apply for a visa to remain permanently in Australia other than a protection visa. It was further submitted that as the applicant has the right to reside anywhere in Europe, she does not fall within Australia’s protection obligations. It was claimed the only way the applicant could stay in Australia that is not based on her children’s studies is by overstaying her visa as an unlawful non-citizen. The submission includes the adverse consequences that would follow if the applicant were to take that course of action. The representative’s argument has been considered but the Tribunal is required to assess whether the applicant in this case is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student guardian having regard to the criteria in cl.590.215. In determining the visa application which is the subject of this review, the Tribunal is not required to assess any other options the applicant may have such as a protection claim and whether she would meet any of the criteria to be granted a protection visa.
The representative submitted that since the applicant’s children have been granted Student visas, the Department is satisfied that the reasons for the children studying in Australia are acceptable. The Tribunal agrees this is the case.
It was claimed that the applicant’s children and former husband are her only family connections to Australia while all her relatives, and her community and support network are in Europe. As stated in this decision, the Tribunal finds the applicant provided very little evidence of ongoing ties to Italy or a third country other than a parent and siblings.
Regarding her economic circumstances, it was submitted the applicant is unable to work in Australia but can work anywhere in Europe as well as access benefits. While this may be the case, the applicant has been and is currently fully supported by her former husband. If she were granted a Student Guardian visa she would be permitted to work in Australia.
The Tribunal is unable to place weight on the representative’s claim that the applicant’s circumstances will change when her children become adults and she is now divorced. Her former husband has stated in writing that he fully supports the applicant while she is in Australia, notwithstanding they are currently divorced. He has not indicated when or if any change will occur to these arrangements.
The Tribunal is satisfied the applicant has no military commitments in her home country and that there are no civil or political issues currently in Italy.
The Tribunal considered the submission that since the applicant’s children have been found to have an intention to reside in Australia temporarily, a Subclass 590 visa will be linked to theirs and there is no way for her to remain long term. As stated in this decision, the Tribunal is required to assess the applicant’s intentions in the context of the current Student Guardian visa application. It is not required to assess whether the applicant would be eligible for any other visa such as a protection visa. In addition, the Tribunal notes Direction 108 does not preclude genuine temporary entrants such as the applicant’s children from changing their intentions over time.[1]
[1] Direction No. 108 Preamble: 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 Tribunal agrees there is no evidence to indicate the applicant has not complied with conditions attached to any previous visa in Australia.
It was submitted the applicant is not using the Student Guardian Visa to unreasonably extend her stay in Australia where there is already a visa record of concern. The Tribunal was advised that since lodging the initial applications in March 2018, it has always been the case that the Student Guardian visa has been sought to allow the children the opportunity to complete their middle and secondary schooling in Australia. The Tribunal understands the applicant does have children attending school in Australia and that she wishes to accompany them. However, she has demonstrated limited ties to her home country or a third country and is able to live in Australia without the requirement to work because of her former husband’s ongoing financial support. The evidence is that she has not been employed since her children were born and while she may be able to find work in Europe, her circumstances in Australia are positive. In assessing the applicant’s circumstances in Australia, the Tribunal finds the Student Guardian visa is being used to maintain ongoing residence.
The Tribunal accepts the representative’s submissions that the there are no relationship concerns because the applicant is the biological mother of the children. It is also accepted that the applicant has knowledge of living in Australia as well as her children’s intended studies and education provider.
Immigration history
The applicant’s immigration history refers to her visa and travel history. The applicant confirmed she came to Australia in 2018 as a visitor and was accompanied by her children. The applicant has been in Australia for nearly seven years at the date of this decision, despite arriving as the holder of a Subclass 600 visa. The applicant’s evidence is that she plans to remain with her children until they are adults or finish their studies. The applicant’s youngest child will not be 18 until 2028 which would extend the applicant’s temporary residency at least a further three years. Based on the amount of time the applicant has spent in Australia after arriving for a short-term visit, the Tribunal is not satisfied the applicant meets the requirements of a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student guardian.

The Tribunal assessed the evidence individually and cumulatively. While there are some aspects of the applicant’s case that weigh somewhat in her favour such as no evidence of non-compliance and the presence of her children who are students in Australia, on balance the weight of evidence is against the applicant in assessing whether she is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student guardian. 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 590.215.
Accordingly, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student guardian as required by cl 590.215.
Given the above findings, the Tribunal finds that the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa are not met. The applicant does not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. Accordingly, the decision under review must be affirmed.
DECISION
The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student Guardian (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.
Dates of hearing(s): 3 October 2024
Representative for the Applicant: Mr Mitchell Simmons
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.
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.