Shaik (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The applicant sought to review a decision to refuse the visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the criteria for a genuine temporary entrant and, crucially, whether they were enrolled in a course of study.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant satisfied the primary criteria for a Subclass 500 visa, specifically the requirement under clause 500.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994 that the applicant be enrolled in a course of study at the time of the decision. The Tribunal also considered the broader criterion of being a genuine temporary entrant, as guided by Direction No. 69.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant’s previous enrolments had expired and that current information from the PRISMS record indicated the applicant was not enrolled in any course of study, having ceased enrolment in a Diploma of Business in December 2019. This fact was raised with the applicant and their representative, and despite opportunities to provide evidence of current enrolment, none was forthcoming. The applicant’s representative highlighted financial difficulties and the applicant's educational background as reasons for needing to study in Australia, but these did not overcome the fundamental requirement of current enrolment.

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