Mira (Migration)

[2021] AATA 4327

Mira (Migration) [2021] AATA 4327 (7 September 2021)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mrs Ivy Dalut Mira
Mr Nhyle Mitch Raphayelle Rosare Dalut
Miss Lorenze Vielle Dalut Mira
Mr Jaiden Kielle Dalut Mira
Mr Alesandro Zielle Dalut Mira

CASE NUMBER:  1935056

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2019/4744869

MEMBER:Peter Booth

DATE:7 September 2021

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

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

·cl.500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Statement made on 07 September 2021 at 9:09am

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine temporary entrant – Direction No.69 – circumstances in which the applicant came to apply for the student visa – changed the level and direction of study – satisfactory course progression – value of the course to applicant’s future – training in commercial cookery – hotel business owned and operated by the applicant’s family – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 360
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 500.212

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 November 2019 to refuse to grant the applicants Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicants applied for the visas on 21 September 2019. At the time of application, Class TU contained two subclasses: Subclass 500 (Student) and Subclass 590 (Student Guardian). The primary visa applicant (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 visas 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) because the applicant was not a genuine temporary entrant.

4. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 5 July 2021 to give evidence and present arguments.

5. The applicants were assisted in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.

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 is a genuine temporary entrant.

   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.

11. The applicant gave evidence at the hearing, the substance of which was as follows.

12. The applicant had read the delegate’s decision dated 22 November 2019 refusing her application for a student visa.

13. The applicant understood and that the issue for determination was whether she was a genuine temporary entrant.

14. The applicant was asked to describe her current enrolment including commencement and completion dates. The applicant said “currently enrolled in commercial cookery, finish certificate three last November, now in certificate four, by July will do diploma, I have evidence that I have finished course”. When asked to state the name of her current enrolment she said “currently certificate for commercial cookery started last November, will end this July, diploma of hospitality management will start 12 July 2021 and end on 5 December 2021”. The Tribunal pointed out that the applicant had provided no proof of her current enrolment and she was invited to do so by 4 pm on the day following the hearing. Subsequent to the hearing the applicant wrote to the Tribunal providing some documents and stated as follows: “Owing to a medical condition which has been significant and resulted in my undergoing two surgeries with more to follow I was unable to complete all assessments. In support of this claim, I attach copies of the medical certificates that were issued to me (3 copies). Due to the foregoing, I have not been allowed to enrol in my next nested course. I have to complete the two subjects before I am allowed to progress to Diploma of Hospitality Management. The process of completing the above subjects is continuing. The requirements have been submitted to the provider and the applicant is simply waiting for the results.” The point of the email of the documents was that the applicant had not yet completed the Certificate IV Commercial Cookery course due to some illness. In a further email the applicant informed the Tribunal that she had received confirmation from the course provider that she had been accepted into the Diploma of Hospitality Management course. The email from the course provider did not state that she had been enrolled but rather that the applicant was now eligible to enrol in the Diploma of Hospitality Management course. The applicant has not provided a confirmation of enrolment document to prove that she is enrolled in the hospitality management course. A search of the course provider record system was undertaken by the Tribunal and it confirms that the applicant is currently enrolled in a Diploma of Hospitality Management course. The Tribunal accepts that the applicant is currently enrolled in the Diploma course.

15. The applicant had also provided information to the Tribunal in the form of a response to a request to do so pursuant to s.359(2) of the Act.

16. In summary the information provided by the applicant was as follows.

17. The applicant completed a Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering degree in the Philippines between 1998 and 2004. Thereafter she was employed as a supervisor in a water refuelling station between 2007 and 2015 for which she derived an annual salary of AU$3300 and as a hotel manager between 2017 and the date that she left the Philippines for which she derived an annual salary of AU$8500.

18. The applicant arrived in Australia on 5 July 2019 and since that time has not returned to her home country.

19. The application for the student visa in question was made on 21 September 2019. The applicant stated her visa history in Australia to be as follows: she stated that she held a visitor visa between July 2019 and October 2019.

20. The applicant stated her study history in Australia to be as follows: she completed a Certificate III in Commercial Cookery between October 2019 and October 2020, she was “studying now” a Certificate IV in Commercial Cookery and had a “future enrolment” in a Diploma of Hospitality Management due to commence in July 2021 and be completed in December 2021.

21. The applicant provided no details in respect of her employment history in Australia.

22. The applicant stated that her five sisters reside in the Philippines.

23. The applicant stated that she owned assets in the Philippines comprising a motor vehicle and a “house and lot”. She estimated the latter had a value of AU$125,000.

24. As to her future employment plans the applicant stated, “An Australian education would also give me a different perspective and meaning of service and quality as far as running a hotel in the Philippines. Learning things from a perspective of my foreign training would allow me to see things differently. Add to that the well-known Philippine hospitality trait, then I believe that I would be able to successfully manage and operate our hotel better and make it even more prosperous. With additional skills in commercial cookery, we would have all the skills necessary to open a new restaurant in the centre of Davao City. I don’t see myself looking for a job elsewhere other than managing our family hotel in Davao City, Philippines, after graduation here in Melbourne. I have already made that commitment to my sisters who are helping me finish my course. The whole hotel staff there are waiting for my return.”

25. As to her expected future remuneration the applicant stated “Given that my primary income is derived from our family business, I would not ordinarily receive a salary, but instead, I am expecting that my newly acquired qualifications will assist us in expanding our business operations and possibly in opening a new branch of our hotel.”

26. The Tribunal informed the applicant that there was a certificate on file from the Department regarding a forged consent by the applicant’s husband which enabled one or more of the applicant’s children to travel to Australia. It was from an anonymous source. The Tribunal informed the applicant that it would give the certificate and the allegation weight. The applicant did not take issue with the course of action.

27. The Tribunal proceeded to ask the applicant some questions arising from the responses paraphrased above. The questions and the answers, in summary were as follows.

28. The applicant confirmed that she completed a Bachelor of Science degree in the Philippines in 2004 and that she was not employed utilising that degree thereafter. She also confirmed that she had not returned to her home country since arriving in 2019.

29. The applicant confirmed that she arrived in Australia on 5 July 2019 as the holder of a tourist visa. Further she stated that she intended to stay in Australia for two weeks. When asked as to the purpose of her visit she said “my son and daughter graduated, it was my gift to them”.

30. She was asked whether she was employed in the Philippines prior to leaving to travel to Australia. She said “yes I managed our hotel”.

31. When asked whether she had resigned that employment or taken leave of absence she said “I took leave”. She was asked as to the period of leave. She responded “indefinitely”. She was asked when she had told her employer that she was taking indefinite leave. She said “when we plan to study cooking”. She was asked when that occurred. She said “last week of July”. When asked when she applied to be enrolled in a course of study she said “last October”. She was asked in what year and she said “2019”.

32. The Tribunal put to her that the tourist visa would normally expire after three months for a particular entry into Australia. She said “yes”. It was put to her that the tourist visa would have expired on or about 5 October 2019. She said “yes”. She was asked when in October she had applied to be enrolled in the course of study. She said “I received email from the agent, 12 September that my school offered me certificate, the letter of offer”. When asked to identify the course she said “commercial cookery”. She was asked when she applied to be enrolled in that course. She said “my agent did so”. When the question was repeated she said “I started to talk to agent in August”. She was asked when she decided to stay and study in Australia. She said “third week of July, also contact school of kids and withdrawing study”.

33. She was asked why she decided to study commercial cookery. She replied “we have business in the Philippines, hotel, I was amazed at the hotels here, compare how they specifically in the restaurant, the plating is amazing, I am a manager, if I can be a chef I can run both, we can expand business”.

34. She was asked whether she had any family in Australia. She responded “two sisters”.

35. When asked how she was supporting herself financially she said “have savings also a fund from the hotel”.

36. In answer to a question from the Tribunal the applicant said that she had eight siblings.

37. When asked whether she had assets in the Philippines in her name she replied “house, parents gave it to us, and a car”.

38. She was asked as to her employment intentions after she completes her study. She replied “I will run our business and revise our menus and expand the hotel”.

39. The Tribunal asked the applicant why she needed commercial cookery skills if she intended to run the business. She said “they have short courses in the Philippines”. When the question was repeated she said “because I have skills in cooking and this will enhance my skills and is in management”.

40. The Tribunal again asked why the applicant was undertaking cookery courses. She said “because it is consistent with the business”.

41. When asked as to the number of rooms in the hotel she said “27 room”. She added “cater for 50 people, function room 150 people”.

42. She was asked whether the principal business was the provision of accommodation or food. She replied “both”.

43. When asked as to the ages of her children she replied “19 and 13 and 12 and 6”. When asked how many of her children were in Australia she said “all of them”. The Tribunal asked the applicant why her children have not returned to the Philippines. She said “because I’m single mother, believe better if together”.

44. She was asked whether she had any employment in Australia. She replied “no”.

45. The applicant declined an opportunity to add anything further to her application for review.

46. In considering whether the applicant has met the genuine temporary entry criterion, the Tribunal had regard to the following factors consistent with cl.500.212 and the Ministerial Direction No.69. The factors were used to weigh up the applicant’s circumstances as a whole, in reaching a finding about whether she has satisfied the genuine temporary entrant criterion.

47. Without diminishing the applicant’s evidence, it can be summarised as follows. The applicant completed a Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering in the Philippines in 2004. She worked as a manager of a hotel owned by her family from 2017. She arrived in Australia on 5 July 2019 as the holder of a tourist visa together with her four children. She has not returned to the Philippines since that time and nor have her children. The children remain in Australia. The application for the student visa was made on 21 September 2019. She has completed a Certificate III and a Certificate IV in Commercial Cookery and will complete a Diploma of Hospitality Management in December 2021. She owns assets in the Philippines. Six of her eight siblings reside in the Philippines. Two of her siblings reside in Australia. She made enquiries about study in August although she said that she decided to stay in Australia and study in the “third week of July”.

48. The Tribunal considers the factors for and against the applicant being a genuine temporary entrant for study in Australia are closely balanced in this case. On the one hand the applicant arrived in Australia as the holder of a tourist visa together with her four children. Within a short space of time she had decided to stay in Australia and study. The applicant is entitled to apply for a student visa as the holder of a tourist visa and to do so whilst in Australia. Nonetheless the circumstances in which the applicant came to apply for a student visa are relevant to consider the option of whether the applicant is a genuine temporary entrant. Further the applicant has not returned to the Philippines since arriving and her four children including one adult child have remained with her in Australia. Also the applicant has changed both the level and direction of her study from completing a bachelor’s level course in computer engineering in the Philippines to now embarking on vocational courses in cookery in Australia. However, in the applicant’s favour, she has enrolled in and completed two vocational courses in commercial cookery and is now engaged in a Diploma of Hospitality Management. She has not embarked in courses of different types or inconsistent study and has completed the courses in which she has been enrolled so far. The Tribunal notes her final course is due to finish in December 2021 and that the applicant is currently studying. The utility of training in commercial cookery is reasonably apparent having regard to the hotel business owned and operated by the applicant and her family in the Philippines.

49. On balance, and not without significant misgivings the Tribunal considers it appropriate to give the benefit of the doubt to the applicant.

50. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. Accordingly, the applicant meets cl.500.212(a).

51. Accordingly, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl.500.212.

52. 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.

53. The applicant having been successful, it follows that the applications of the remaining applicants should also be remitted.

    DECISION

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

    ·cl.500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    Peter Booth
    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;

    dwhether 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.