Kadupiti Mudalige (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant the applicant a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The applicant failed to provide requested information regarding genuine access to funds within the prescribed period and also failed to attend the Tribunal hearing. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa, specifically concerning genuine access to funds, and whether the refusal to grant an adjournment was reasonable.

The Tribunal considered the principles established in *MIAC v Li* (2013) 249 CLR 332 regarding requests for adjournment, noting that such discretion must be exercised reasonably and with regard to the statutory purpose of conducting reviews in a fair, just, economical, informal, and quick manner. The Tribunal found that the applicant's request for an adjournment, based on being unable to take a day off work, was not reasonable given that a phone hearing was offered and the applicant had been aware of the need to provide financial information for some time. The applicant had received multiple communications from both the Department and the Tribunal requesting proof of genuine access to funds, current enrolment, and sponsorship, but had not complied.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa, particularly in relation to genuine access to funds. The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the visa.