Gyeltshen (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to refuse to grant the applicants Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas. The applicants had applied for the visas to undertake study in Australia. The delegate refused the visas on the basis that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of financial capacity, as required by cl 500.214 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth). The Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision. The applicants appealed to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, which remitted the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the financial capacity requirements of cl 500.214 of the Regulations. This clause requires applicants to demonstrate that sufficient funds will be available to meet their costs and expenses, as well as those of any family members in Australia, during their intended stay. Furthermore, the Tribunal must be satisfied that the applicant has genuine access to these funds. The specific requirements for evidence of financial capacity were set out in an instrument, LIN 19/198.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's enrolment in a Graduate Diploma of Strategic Leadership, which commenced in July 2023 and is scheduled for completion in July 2025. Based on the duration of study and the applicant's circumstances, the Tribunal calculated the required funds to be AUD$46,903.00, encompassing course fees, living costs, and travel expenses. The applicant provided a letter from the Commonwealth Bank of Australia confirming a joint account balance of $50,500.00. The Tribunal found that this evidence, being a deposit with a financial institution, satisfied the form requirements of section 10 of LIN 19/198. The Tribunal was satisfied that the amount held in the account was sufficient to meet the applicants' costs and expenses, with a reasonable margin for foreseeable overruns.

The Tribunal concluded that the applicant met the requirements of cl 500.214. As the Tribunal was able to find in favour of the visa applicant on the basis of the material before it, a hearing was not considered necessary. The matter was remitted for reconsideration by the Tribunal.