KOTCHAWONG (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Kotchawong, an applicant for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the eligibility requirements for the visa, specifically concerning enrolment in a course of study. The Tribunal, presided over by Wendy Banfield, was tasked with reviewing the decision to refuse the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant was enrolled in an approved course of study at the time of the decision, as mandated by clause 500.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This clause requires an applicant to be enrolled in a "full-time registered course," which is further defined by the Regulations. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant met the criteria for being a genuine temporary entrant, although the lack of enrolment was the central failing.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had failed to provide a Certificate of Enrolment (COE) or other evidence demonstrating current enrolment in a registered course of study, despite being repeatedly invited to do so. The applicant himself admitted to discontinuing his studies around July 2017 due to immigration issues, stating he was not comfortable continuing. The Tribunal found that this admission confirmed the applicant did not meet the essential criterion of being enrolled in a course of study at the time of the decision. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the primary applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the visa. As the secondary applicant could not meet the criteria without the primary applicant satisfying them, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visas.