Gundala (Migration)

[2021] AATA 4942

Gundala (Migration) [2021] AATA 4942 (18 November 2021)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Ms Mounika Gundala
Mr Sai Kumar Parvatha Reddy
Master Srithik Reddy Parvatha Reddy

CASE NUMBER:  2001591

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2019/5397460

MEMBER:Brian Camilleri

DATE:18 November 2021

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the applications for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the first named applicant, Ms Mounika Gundala, meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:

· cl.500.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the applications for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the second named applicant, Mr Sai Kumar Parvatha Reddy meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:

· cl.500.311 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the applications for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the third named applicant, Master Srithik Reddy Parvatha Reddy meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:

· cl.500.311 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 18 November 2021 at 7:51am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION –Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – subclass 500 (Student) visa– excellent course progress – current studies are of value to future – family and social ties to home country – new COE provided – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 359, 360, 499

Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cls 500.211,500.311

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 January 2020 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 27 October 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 visa 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) and the applicant did not comply with the genuine temporary entrant criterion.

4.     5 August 2021 the Tribunal wrote to the applicant pursuant to s.359 (2) of the Act, inviting the applicant to provide information in writing of the courses she was undertaking and her study and stay in Australia. The invitation was sent to the last address provided in connection with the review and advised that, if the information was not provided in writing by the prescribed period, being 19 August 2021, or within any extended time as requested and granted, the Tribunal may make a decision on the review without further steps to obtain the information and the applicant would lose any entitlement she might otherwise have had under the Act to appear before the Tribunal to give evidence and present arguments.

5.     The applicant responded on 19 August 2021 (within the prescribed time). In her response, the review applicant indicated that she consented to the matter being determined without a hearing. The Tribunal is satisfied that the necessary consent has been given under s.360(2)(b) of the Act and that, pursuant to s.360(3), the review applicant is no longer entitled to appear before it. This matter has therefore been determined on the evidence available to the Tribunal.

6.     For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

7. 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 complies with the genuine temporary entrant criterion.

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

8. 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?

9. 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.

10.      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.

Applicant’s Circumstances in Home Country

11.      The applicant is twenty-nine (29) years old. She is married. Her husband was born in India but currently resides in Australia. He is the second named applicant. They have a son who resides in India. He is the third named applicant. Her parents and sister also reside in the applicant’s home country of India. The applicant’s father is a farmer, and her mother is a housewife. Prior to entering Australia, she studied a Bachelor of Technology (Computer Science and Engineering), graduating in 2014. She has worked in the following employment positions: (a) Programmer Analyst/Junior Prod Specialist (2015-2018). She declined to list her annal salary. She declared land in India owned by her husband’s family (valued at $130,000) as an asset. The applicant submitted a signed, notarised Declaration (dated 18 August 2021) from her mother-in-law stating the applicant’s husband, being the oldest son, would be the joint manager of the land upon his return to India. She submitted a notarised Affidavit from her younger brother-in-law in similar terms with the same date. She declared that her parents support her financially.

Applicant’s Circumstances in Australia

12.      The applicant first arrived in Australia on 25 September 2018 as a dependant on her husband’s Temporary Skilled Graduate (VF-476) Visa valid until 25 March 2020. She came in order to visit her husband. She left her son in the care of her mother-in-law.

13.      On 27 October 2019 (whilst in Australia), she applied for a Student (Subclass 500) Visa. At the time she was enrolled in the following courses: (a) Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management; (b) Master of Information Technology and Systems. Her application was rejected on 22 January 2020.

14.      In written submissions to the Tribunal, the applicant listed annual living expenses of $20,760. She listed employment as a “Pick Packer” (from November 2019 to May 2021) earning $40,000 per annum.

Applicant’s Movement and Immigration History

15.The Tribunal had access to the applicant’s movement and immigration history. Since her arrival in Australia on 25/09/2018 the applicant has made the following trips to and from Australia:

Trip	Departure from Australia	Arrival in Australia
Onshore
1	20/03/2019	26/05/2019
First Arrival	25/09/2018

16.      Given the COVID 19 pandemic and resulting travel restrictions, the applicant’s recent lack of travel is unremarkable. The Tribunal has no evidence before it that the applicant has breached any visa conditions.

Applicant’s Academic Record and Progress

17.      At the time of making its decision the Tribunal had available it the applicant’s academic record as set out in the Provider Registration International Student Management System (PRISMS) (as at (23/06/21). It showed the courses undertaken by the applicant. Those courses successfully completed have their status described as “Finished” (shaded in grey). Courses not completed are described as “Cancelled”.

Course	Status
Master of Information Technology and Systems (28 February 2022 to 31 July 2023)		Approved
Master of Information Technology and Systems (01 March 2021 to 26 February 2023)		Cancelled
Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management (02 November 2019 to 06 March 2021)		Finished

18.      According to PRISMS, the applicant has successfully completed her first proposed course. She is currently on a Bridging Visa. She is unable to commence her second proposed) course (a master’s degree without an approved Student Visa. She submitted a new CoE demonstrating she has deferred this course pending the outcome of the Tribunal’s decision. The Tribunal finds the applicant has made academic progress.

Value of Course to Applicant’s Future Prospects

19.      The applicant provided a Statement to the Department and a separate statement to the Tribunal. She comes from a farming family and claimed she and her family-owned land own land although she provided no evidence of this. She provided notarised evidence of her husband’s entitlement to family land. She met her husband at college where they were both studying in April 2011. She completed her Bachelor of Technology in 2014 and submitted evidence of her graduation. The couple married in 2016. Their son (the third named applicant) was born in August 2017. Her husband was granted a Temporary Skilled Graduate Visa to Australia in April 2018. He found work in Australia and relocated here. The applicant remained in India with their son and continued working with her employer, an IT company. She resigned from her employment in August 2018 and travelled to Australia as a dependant on her husband’s visa. She left their son in the care of her mother-in-law. She stated that her mother’s instincts were torn, and she returned to India around March 2019 to be with her son. She found that her son was faring well with her mother-in-law, which allowed her to return to Australia to be with her husband. The couple are currently on Bridging Visas. The applicant established to the Tribunal’s satsifaction her motivations for coming to Australia and for choosing her proposed courses. She has enrolled in a master’s course costing $24,000, which is not the type of inexpensive and short course typically enrolled in by applicants who wish to use the student visa program in order to maintain ongoing residency. Her proposed courses align with her previous education and work experience. She aims to improve her ICT skills in order to increase her income earning capacity upon return to India. She declared that she has no intention whatsoever of remaining in Australia and wants to complete her final course then return home. On return to India, she expects to earn between $40,000 and $60,000 per annum based upon the increase in her skills acquired in Australia. The Tribunal finds that the applicant has established the likely benefit of her proposed courses to her future employment prospects and income earning capacity.

20.      The Tribunal is required to make its decision at the time the matter under review based on the facts at the time (i.e., at the date of its decision) and not as they existed at the date of the delegate’s decision. In this case the decision under review (at the time it was made by the delegate) was reasonable and appropriate. But circumstances have changed since that time. The applicant has provided further information to establish her motives for studying in Australia and documentary evidence to support her claim. She provided evidence or her husband’s entitlement to land. She finished the first course contemplated by the visa application (the Advanced Diploma) whilst awaiting the date of this decision by the Tribunal. It is evident that she has performed consistently in accordance with her declared intentions and paid significant fees towards the study of the courses in question, all of which reinforces the conclusion that the applicant is a temporary entrant. Although the horizon for completion of her current course is over a year, the Tribunal has no evidence before it to suggest that the applicant is not a genuine temporary entrant or that she does not propose to leave Australia at the end of her course.

21.      On the basis of the above, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. Accordingly, the applicant meets cl.500.212(a).

Other Relevant Matters

22.      The Tribunal has considered whether there are any other matters that are relevant to the assessment of the applicant's genuine intention to temporarily study and stay in Australia and finds that there are no other relevant matters for consideration.

23.      Given the above findings, the appropriate course is to remit the application for the visa to the Minister to consider the remaining criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa.

DECISION

24.      The Tribunal remits the application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa for reconsideration, with the direction that the applicant meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:

a.cl.500.211 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Mr Sai Kumar Parvatha Reddy

Second Named applicant

25.The second named applicant applied for a Student (Temporary) (class TU) Student (subclass 500) visa.

Information and evidence considered

26.The delegate made his decision under section 65 of the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunal has considered the following: (a) relevant legislation contained in the Migration Act and Migration Regulations 1994; (b) relevant policy and procedural information; (c) documents and information provided by the applicant(s); the decision under review.

Findings

27.On the basis of all the information available to the Tribunal, including the documents and information the applicant provided, the Tribunal finds that the criteria for the grant of a student visa are met by the applicant.

Reasons

28.A valid application for a student visa has been made by the second named applicant. A visa cannot be granted unless the relevant criteria set out in the Migration Act and the Migration Regulations are satisfied. The Tribunal is satisfied that clause 500.311 in Schedule 2 of the Migration Regulations are met. This clause provides that:

500.311

The applicant is a member of the family unit of a person (the primary person) who holds a student visa, having satisfied the primary criteria for that visa, and either:

a)the applicant became a member of the family unit of the primary person before the grant of the student visa to the primary person, and was included in:

(i)the primary person’s application under sub regulation 2.07AF (3); or

(ii)information provided in relation to the primary person’s application under sub regulation 2.07AF (4); or

b)the applicant became a member of the family unit of the primary person:

(i)after the grant of the student visa to the primary person; and

(ii)before the application was made.

29.As clause 500.311 is met by the second named applicant, the Tribunal finds that the criteria for the grant of Student visa are met by the second named applicant.

Assessment against the criteria of other subclasses in class TU

30.As the application was not made on Form 157G (Application for a Student Guardian visa), the Tribunal has not reviewed the decision against the subclass 590 Student Guardian visa criteria in this visa class

DECISION

31.The Tribunal remits the applications for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the second named applicant, Mr Sai Kumar Parvatha Reddy, meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:

a.cl.500.311 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Master Srithik Reddy Parvatha Reddy

Third Named Applicant

32.The second named applicant applied for a Student (Temporary) (class TU) Student (subclass 500) visa.

Information and evidence considered

33.The delegate made his decision under section 65 of the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunal has considered the following: (a) relevant legislation contained in the Migration Act and Migration Regulations 1994; (b) relevant policy and procedural information; (c) documents and information provided by the applicant(s); the decision under review.

Findings

34.On the basis of all the information available to the Tribunal, including the documents and information the applicant provided, the Tribunal finds that the criteria for the grant of a student visa are met by the applicant.

Reasons

35.A valid application for a student visa has been made by the third named applicant. A visa cannot be granted unless the relevant criteria set out in the Migration Act and the Migration Regulations are satisfied. The Tribunal is satisfied that clause 500.311 in Schedule 2 of the Migration Regulations are met. This clause provides that:

500.311

The applicant is a member of the family unit of a person (the primary person) who holds a student visa, having satisfied the primary criteria for that visa, and either:

c)the applicant became a member of the family unit of the primary person before the grant of the student visa to the primary person, and was included in:

(i)the primary person’s application under sub regulation 2.07AF (3); or

(ii)information provided in relation to the primary person’s application under sub regulation 2.07AF (4); or

d)the applicant became a member of the family unit of the primary person:

(i)after the grant of the student visa to the primary person; and

(ii)before the application was made.

36.As clause 500.311 is met by the third named applicant, the Tribunal finds that the criteria for the grant of Student visa are met by the third named applicant.

Assessment against the criteria of other subclasses in class TU

37.As the application was not made on Form 157G (Application for a Student Guardian visa), the Tribunal has not reviewed the decision against the subclass 590 Student Guardian visa criteria in this visa class

DECISION

38.The Tribunal remits the applications for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas for reconsideration, with the direction that the third named applicant, Master Srithik Reddy Parvatha Reddy, meets the following criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa:

a.cl.500.311 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Brian Camilleri
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;

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.

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.