Mohammed (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, Subclass 500 (Student). The applicant had applied for the visa to undertake study in Australia. The delegate refused the visa on the basis that the applicant had not provided evidence of meeting the English language proficiency requirements. The applicant sought review of this decision by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied the criteria for a Subclass 500 visa, specifically concerning enrolment in a current course of study and English language proficiency. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to satisfy these criteria, particularly in light of an invitation to a hearing and a subsequent consent to a decision on the papers.

The Tribunal noted that clause 500.211 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 required the applicant to be enrolled in a full-time registered course of study at the time of the decision. The applicant had been invited to provide a Confirmation of Enrolment or other documentary evidence of current enrolment, but failed to do so. While an offer letter from Aspen College was provided, this did not constitute proof of current enrolment. Furthermore, the applicant had not provided evidence of meeting the English language proficiency requirements as stipulated by clause 500.213 of the Regulations, despite having had ample opportunity to do so. The Tribunal considered these failures, coupled with the applicant's consent to a decision on the papers without further participation, indicated a lack of genuine intent to satisfy the visa criteria.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the visa.