Pandit (Migration)

[2020] AATA 4715

Pandit (Migration) [2020] AATA 4715 (8 November 2020)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Ms Sheelam Pandit

CASE NUMBER:  1905072

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2018/5549924

MEMBER:Margaret Forrest

DATE:8 November 2020

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.

Statement made on 08 November 2020 at 3:43pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine temporary entrant – visa, travel and study history – gap in study – value of course to applicant’s future – length of residence and frequent visits to home country – living with two siblings, both Australian citizens – other family members in home country – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 500.212(a)

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 13 February 2019 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 10 December 2018. At the time of application, Class TU contained two subclasses: Subclass 500 (Student) and Subclass 590 (Student Guardian). 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 visa 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 delegate was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine temporary entrant.

4. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal by telephone on 23 October 2020 to give evidence and present arguments.

5. The Tribunal exercised its discretion to hold the hearing by telephone. The hearing was held during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Tribunal determined it was reasonable to hold a hearing by telephone, having regard to the nature of this matter and the individual circumstances of the applicant. The Tribunal also had regard to the Tribunal’s objective of providing a mechanism of review that is fair, just, economical and quick, and the delay to the matter if the hearing was not to be conducted by telephone. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was given a fair opportunity to give evidence and present arguments.

6. The applicant was assisted in relation to the review by their registered migration agent who provided written submissions to the Tribunal and who attended the telephone hearing and made oral submissions.

7. On 19 October 2020, the Tribunal sent the applicant a copy of her records from the Provider Registration and International Student Management System known as PRISMS.  The Tribunal indicated that the Member would refer to these records during the hearing.  Given that the information contained in the applicant’s PRISMS record is consistent with information already given to the Tribunal by the applicant, the Tribunal did not put this record to the applicant during the hearing. 

8. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that decision under review should be affirmed.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

9. 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)

10. 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?

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. The applicant submitted an information form to the Tribunal on 28 May 2020.  The applicant confirmed that all of the information contained in this form was correct. The applicant confirmed that she first arrived in Australia on 10 September 2008.  That visa was valid from 4 September 2008 to 3 December 2008.  Since that time, the applicant has been granted seven further visitor visas the last of which was granted on 24 October 2018 and expired on 13 December 2018.  The applicant has travelled back and forward between India and Australia since her first arrival in Australia on 10 September 2008.     

14. The applicant submitted her current Student visa application on 10 December 2018. When the applicant submitted her visa application, she was proposing to study a General English course that commenced in January 2019 and was scheduled to conclude in January 2020.  Since submitting her student visa application, the applicant has completed one (10 week) General English course and is currently enrolled in a second General English course.

15. The applicant told the Tribunal that prior to coming to Australia, she completed a Bachelor of Arts in India between 1989 and 1992.  Her majors were English, Punjabi, Political Science and Music.

16. The applicant said that between 2008 and 2018 she worked as a tutor in India. The applicant said she tutored students in basic education and would help them with their homework in Maths and Hindi, but not really in English as her level was not good enough.  The applicant said she has never worked in Australia

17. The Tribunal asked the applicant about the circumstances in her home country. In response to the following question contained in the information form, ‘If there are similar courses available in the Main Applicant’s home country or region to the course(s) they are currently studying and/or propose to study in Australia, please give details of the Main Applicant’s reasons for not undertaking the course(s) in their home country or region’, the applicant answered as follows:

    Similar courses are not available in my home country as the English is second language in India.  It is not taught by native speakers.

18. The Tribunal asked the applicant about her family ties to India. The applicant said that her mother and cousins and aunts presently reside in India.  The applicant said that she speaks to her mother every day and that she contacts her other relatives via social media. The applicant confirmed that since arriving in Australia in 2008 she has returned to India 14 times.  The applicant said that she would come to Australia for 3 months at a time and then go back to India.  The applicant said that she last saw her mother in December 219 and that she has been in Australia continuously since that time.  The applicant said she plans to go back to India because her mother cannot stay there alone, and she has to go back to look after her mother who has health issues.  The applicant said that her community ties in India consist of her involvement in her school’s old student organisation who she would organise get-togethers for. 

19. The applicant said the she did not have any property in her name in India, but that she expects to inherit it one day.  The Tribunal accepts this.  The applicant said she has no concerns about military service commitments or political and civil unrest in India.

20. The Tribunal asked the applicant about her potential circumstances in Australia.  The applicant said that her brother and sister live in Australia.  The applicant said her sister is a citizen of Australia who has been in Australia since 2005.  The applicant said her sister did study but is now working as a service manager in aged care. The applicant’s said her sister’s husband is also an Australian citizen

21. The applicant said that her brother is also an Australian citizen and he has been in Australia since 2007.  The applicant said that her brother arrived in Australia on a student visa but is now working as at HSBC Bank.  The applicant said her brother is single but that he plans to marry soon.  The applicant said that she presently lives with her brother and sister in Australia and that every time she has come to Australia since arriving in 2008, she has lived with her brother and sister.

22. The applicant confirmed that her only other family member living in Australia is a cousin who lives in Adelaide.  However, the applicant has never met this cousin.  The applicant confirmed that she does not have a partner.  The applicant said that she has no community ties in Australia and she did not provide to the Tribunal any information about property in Australia. The applicant said she has never worked in Australia and that her brother and sister provide her with financial support.

23. Taking all this evidence into account, on balance the Tribunal considers that the applicant’s family ties to India do not of themselves present a significant incentive for the applicant to return to India. In making this finding, the Tribunal has placed significant weight on the fact that the applicant has been travelling between India and Australia for 12 years and that since she last saw her mother in India in December 2019, she has managed to keep in contact with her via electronic means.  The Tribunal has also taken into account that fact that the applicant resides with her sister and brother (who are both Australian citizens) in Australia.

24. The Tribunal also finds that when all of this evidence is considered, on balance the applicant’s family ties to Australia do present a significant incentive for the applicant to remain in Australia. The Tribunal has placed significant weight on the fact that the applicant’s sister and brother are both citizens of Australia and the applicant has lived with them whenever she has been in Australia since 2008.  The Tribunal has also taken into account the fact that the applicant’s sister and brother support her financially.

25. The applicant said that her current course is scheduled to conclude in April 2021.  The Tribunal asked the applicant when she plans to leave Australia and the applicant said as soon as she finishes her course.  The Tribunal asked the applicant if she had booked a return flight home and the applicant said she had been unable to due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

26. The Tribunal asked the applicant whether she completed the English Course that she was enrolled in when she first applied for her student visa.  The applicant she did not because she thought that she could only study for three months.  The applicant said that after commencing her first English Course in January 2019, she told her college she could not study anymore so she got a certificate for a 10-week course.

27. The applicant told the Tribunal that she then re-enrolled in an English Course in June 2020.  The applicant said she has completed one level of this course but that she would not complete the second level until April 2021.  The applicant’s migration agent clarified that the applicant finished one level of this course on 15 October 2020 but that the applicant’s certificate had not been issued yet. 

28. The Tribunal asked the applicant why she had gone on to complete/enrol in a second and third English Course when she was originally proposing to study one English Course and she completed a 10-week English course in 2019.  The applicant said that her original English Course was scheduled for one year and would cover all levels from Beginner to Advanced.  The applicant said she had only completed 10 weeks of this course which was the first level.

29. The Tribunal asked the applicant if there had been a gap in her study from April 2019 to June 2020.  The applicant said yes.  The Tribunal asked the applicant if she checked with her college as to whether she could continue studying.  The applicant said her college said they did not know whether she could continue studying. 

30. The Tribunal asked the applicant if she spoke to a migration agent about whether she could continue studying.  The applicant said she spoke to her previous agent and what study she could do.  The applicant said her previous agent told her she could only study for 3 months on her visitor visa and that the same condition applied to her bridging visa.   

31. In light of the evidence that the applicant re-enrolled in study in June 2020 and has continued to study since that time, the Tribunal does not accept the applicant’s explanation for the gap in her study between April 2019 and June 2020.

32. The Tribunal asked the applicant about the value of the courses to her future.  In the information form the applicant submitted to the Tribunal, the applicant said she plans to expand her tutoring service to include IETLS/PTE coaching.  The applicant also submitted a letter of offer dated 15 October 2020 to the Tribunal from Samayra Overseas Study Visa Consultants in India.  This letter of offer is for the position of IELTS English tutor commencing on 1 July 2021.  The letter indicates that the position ‘will be assessed upon successful competition of your ENGLISH GRAMMAR ELICOS COURSE’. 

33. The Tribunal asked the applicant what her current future plans are.  The applicant said that after finishing her English Course she will be capable of teaching students in India who want to go abroad. 

34. The Tribunal asked the applicant about the letter of offer.  The applicant said that after studying English in Australia, she will be very good at English and will work at a consulting service initially.  The applicant said that when she has some experience she will open her own coaching centre.  The applicant’s migration agent said that when the information form was submitted in May, the applicant did not have the letter of offer. 

35. The Tribunal asked the applicant if she had a written business plan for her planned business.  The applicant said not and accepted that her business was an idea that she plans to implement in the future.   

36. The Tribunal asked the applicant why she needs a third English Course when she has already completed two courses.  The applicant said the courses she had already completed were not a satisfactory level.  The applicant said the courses she had completed were not what she needed to give education to student in India and that she needed to complete all levels.

37. The Tribunal asked the applicant how she would know her level of English was satisfactory in April 2021.  The applicant said that her teachers have told her she is making progress. 

38. The applicant told the Tribunal that prior to coming to Australia she earned approximately AUD$20,000 per year as a tutor in India.  The applicant said that she has never worked in Australia. The letter of offer the applicant submitted to the Tribunal indicates that the applicant has been offered a position where she will earn AUD$5,880 per years.  The Tribunal asked the applicant why she would take a job where she would be earning less than before she left India.  The applicant said this would be her first job after studying in Australia and that they would promote her.

39. The Tribunal has taken into account the applicant’s immigration history insofar as the applicant was originally planning to undertake an English Course that would conclude in January 2020, but now intends to extend her stay in Australia to April 2021. The Tribunal has also taken into account the fact that the applicant has been travelling back and forth between India and Australia for a period of 12 years and was granted 8 visitor visas before she applied for her student visa.

40. The applicant indicated to the Tribunal that her brother and sister were available to provide evidence about the applicant extending her stay in Australia in the past to support her sister who suffered from mental health problems and also about the applicant inheriting property from their mother in India in the future.

41. The applicant said that her sister had some mental health issues and work problems which caused her stress. The applicant said that in July 2018 she that she got permission from the Department to stay in Australia on her visitor visa for longer to provide support for her sister.  The applicant said this was the only time she requested to extend her visa due to her wishing to support her sister.  The Tribunal accepts this. 

42. The applicant said that she requested to extend her visitor visa a number of other times but she could not remember exactly when.  The applicant said that one time she requested an extension because her brother was getting engaged.   

43. As a result of the Tribunal accepting the applicant’s evidence regarding her sister’s mental health problems and the applicant’s evidence that she expects to inherit property from her mother in India, the Tribunal did not hear any evidence from the applicant’s brother or sister.

44. The Tribunal considers that an applicant who is a genuine temporary entrant will have circumstances which support a genuine intention to remain in Australia temporarily, recognising the possibility that this may change over time to utilise lawful means to remain in Australia.

45. The Tribunal considers that when the following findings and evidence are considered that the Tribunal is concerned the applicant is attempting to use the Student visa system to stay in Australia for longer and that a further Student visa may be used primarily for maintaining ongoing residence:

    a.the Tribunal’s finding that the applicant’s family ties to India do not of themselves constitute a strong incentive for the applicant to return to India;

    b.the Tribunal’s finding that the applicant’s family ties to Australia do constitute a strong incentive for the applicant to remain in Australia;

    c.the fact that the applicant did not study between April 2019 and June 2020 and the Tribunal does not accept the applicant’s explanation for this gap in study;

    d.the fact that the applicant expects to earn less when she returns to India than before she left; and

    e.the fact that the applicant was originally planning to undertake an English Course that would conclude in January 2020, but now intends to extend her stay in Australia to April 2021; 

    f.the fact that the applicant has been travelling back and forth between India and Australia for a period of 12 years and was granted 8 visitor visas before she applied for a student visa.

1. On the basis of the above, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. Accordingly, the applicant does not meet cl.500.212(a).

   Conclusion on cl.500.212

2. Accordingly, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl.500.212.

3. Given the above findings, the Tribunal finds that the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 500 (Student) visa are not met. The applicant does not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa. Accordingly, the decision under review must be affirmed.

   DECISION

4. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.

   Margaret Forrest
   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.