Singh (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, Subclass 500 (Student), heard by Member Wendy Banfield of the Tribunal. The applicant sought review of a decision not to grant the visa. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the eligibility criteria for the visa, specifically concerning their enrolment in a course of study.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied the primary criteria for a Subclass 500 visa, as set out in Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The key issue was whether the applicant was enrolled in a "full-time registered course" at the time of the decision, as stipulated by clause 500.211 of the Regulations. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant met the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa, which the applicant did not claim to satisfy.

Member Banfield reasoned that clause 500.211 of the Regulations requires an applicant to be enrolled in a course of study at the time of the decision. The definition of "course of study" includes a "full-time registered course," which in turn requires the course to be provided by an institution registered to provide such courses to overseas students. The Tribunal noted that no evidence, such as a current Certificate of Enrolment, had been provided by the applicant to demonstrate their enrolment, despite a specific request. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the enrolment criterion, and therefore, the criteria for the Subclass 500 visa were not met.

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