Kaur (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Tribunal regarding the refusal of Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas, Subclass 500 (Student), for the applicant and her dependants. The primary applicant was found not to meet the criteria for a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, which consequently meant her dependants also failed to satisfy the relevant criteria for their visa applications.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the primary applicant satisfied the requirements of clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, specifically whether she was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student. This required the Tribunal to consider whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay in Australia temporarily and intended to comply with visa conditions, having regard to her circumstances, immigration history, and any other relevant matters, as guided by Direction No. 69.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the applicant did not meet the genuine temporary entrant criterion. The Tribunal noted the applicant's immigration history, which included a succession of student and temporary work visas since 2008, with a significant period between 2012 and 2017 where no study was undertaken onshore. Furthermore, her current enrolment in a Bachelor of Business was unrelated to her previous studies. The Tribunal concluded that these factors, among others, indicated that the applicant was using the student visa program to maintain ongoing residence in Australia rather than for the genuine purpose of study. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student.