Sanjel (Migration)

This matter concerned an appeal by a 29-year-old citizen of Nepal against a decision to refuse him a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The applicant had resided in Australia since September 2008, holding various student or bridging visas, and had not returned to his home country during this period. He was enrolled in a Bachelor of Professional Accounting, due to finish in March 2018, and sought to undertake further postgraduate studies. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, as required by the criteria for the visa.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant met the primary criteria for a Subclass 500 visa, specifically whether he was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student. This involved assessing the applicant's circumstances, including his extended period of residence in Australia, his lack of time spent in his home country since his initial arrival, the limited value of further studies in his specific circumstances, and the strength of his ties to Australia compared to his ties to Nepal.

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal considered the applicant's extensive time in Australia, which amounted to over nine and a half years at the time of the decision, and his intention to undertake further studies that would extend his onshore residence to over 12 years. The Tribunal found that the applicant's ties to Australia, particularly his close and dependent relationship with his Australian citizen brother and sister-in-law, with whom he resided and provided significant domestic support, were stronger than his ties to Nepal. This led the Tribunal to form a strong sense that the applicant was using the student visa program to maintain his residence in Australia, rather than for the genuine purpose of study.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the visa.