Singh Thakuri (Migration) - [2025] ARTA 2071

Singh Thakuri (Migration) [2025] ARTA 2071 (12 September 2025)
DECISION AND
REASONS FOR DECISION
Applicant:Mr Dipak Raj Singh Thakuri
Respondent:  Minister for Immigration and Citizenship
Tribunal Number:  2411909

Tribunal:General Member M Currie
Place:Sydney
Date: 12 September 2025
Decision:The decision under review is affirmed.

Statement made on 12 September 2025 at 11:50am
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – change to study path – incomplete courses – poor academic record – vocational course – limited knowledge of course – value of Australian courses – political, social and cultural ties to home country – maintains ties to family in home country – professional footballer – stands to inherit share of family property in home country – financially supported by family – no significant ties in Australia – breach of visa conditions – earnings in Australia are a significant incentive to stay – earns more than projected income in home country – inconsistent claims – decision under review affirmed
LEGISLATION
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 65, 499; Direction No. 108
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 500.212
STATEMENT OF REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 1 May 2024 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The applicant applied for the visa on 1 November 2023. 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.
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 (Cth) (the Regulations) because the delegate was not satisfied the applicant was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student.
The applicant lodged an application for review with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). On 14 October 2024, the AAT became the Administrative Review Tribunal (the Tribunal). Under the transitional provisions in the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (the Transitional Act), applications for review to the AAT that were not finalised before 14 October 2024 are taken to be an application for review to the Tribunal. The Transitional Act gives the Tribunal the authority to continue and finalise any aspect of the review not already completed by the AAT. This decision and statement of reasons is made by the Tribunal.
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 8 September 2025 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Nepali and English languages. The applicant was assisted in relation to the review.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal considers the decision under review should be affirmed.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
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 satisfies cl 5000.212.
Genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student (cl 500.212)
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?
In considering whether the applicant satisfies cl 500.212(a), the Tribunal must have regard to Direction No 108, ‘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.
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.
Analysis and reasons
Background
The applicant is a citizen of Nepal who was born in January 2000. He arrived in Australia in July 2023 on a temporary entry visa intending to play football (Soccer) in Australia with a Nepali Football Club. The applicant had previously worked in Nepal as a professional football player and had played for the national team in that country. His original intention was to stay in this country for 2-3 months playing football.
In November 2023, the applicant submitted a student visa application. As part of that application, he submitted a GTE Statement (the 2023 GTE Statement) which outlined his intention to study in Australia. In that written statement the applicant indicated that he intended to study business studies in Australia and then return to Nepal. His student visa application indicated that after completing his business studies in Australia he intended to return to his home country and work as a Business Manager or a Business Development Manager or in a similar business role in Nepal. The applicant’s Student Visa application indicated the applicant intended to complete three business courses at the Albright Institute of Business. These were: a Certificate II in Workplace Skills; a Certificate III in Business and a Diploma of Business.
The applicant’s student visa application also included:
·A copy of the biodata page from a 2021 Nepalese passport issued in his name.
·A copy of an Overseas Student Health Insurance Cover Certificate issued in his name. The policy certificate indicated that he had paid for health insurance between October 2023 and July 2026.
·An Overseas Student Confirmation-of-Enrolment Certificate for a Certificate II in Workplace Skills Course which commenced in October 2023 and was scheduled to end in April 2024.
·An Overseas Student Confirmation-of-Enrolment Certificate for a Certificate III in Business which was scheduled to commence in May 2024 and to end in May 2025.
·An Overseas Student Confirmation-of-Enrolment Certificate for a Diploma of Business which was scheduled to commence in May 2025 and to end in May 2026.
·A copy of a Nepalese school leaving certificate examination issued in December 2017 and a ‘Grade Sheet’ associated with that examination.
The Tribunal has considered all the evidence the applicant provided to the Department as part of his student Visa application.
Tribunal outreach
As noted above, the applicant’s student visa application was refused in May 2024 and the applicant subsequently submitted his application for review to the Tribunal.
In July 2025, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s representative and notified him that the applicant’s case would soon be submitted to a Tribunal Member. That correspondence invited the applicant to give, in writing, all relevant information about the course(s) of study he was undertaking and his entry and stay in Australia as a student. The Tribunal requested the applicant submit this information in a Student Visa Information Form. The applicant subsequently provided a completed Student Visa Information Form to the Tribunal that had been signed by the applicant’s representative indicating the information in the form was complete and correct.
The completed Student Visa Information Form contained information about the applicant; information about his education and employment before coming to Australia; information about his travel to Australia and other countries; information about his current Visa application; information his current and previous enrolment in educational courses in Australia; information about his employment and expenses in this country, and other circumstances including information about his assets, his future plans, his family, and his community ties to Australia and Nepal. The Tribunal has considered the completed Student Visa Information Form.
In support of his application to the Tribunal, the applicant has also provided a range of additional documentation:
·A seven-page written statement dated 4 August 2025 (the 2025 GTE Statement).
·A copy of a Nepalese Relationship Verification Certificate dated 31 July 2025 outlining the applicant’s family composition in Nepal.
·A Nepalese property Valuation Verification Certificate dated 31 July 2025.
·A Nepalese Annual Income Verification Certificate dated 31 July 2025.
·A copy of a let Nepalese Land Survey prepared by the Ministry of Land Reform & Management and a Land Ownership Registration Certificate.
·A Balance Certificate issued by the Kumari Bank Limited in Nepal dated 6 of August 2025 for an account in the name of the applicant’s father.
·A Certificate of Nepalese Citizenship issued in the name of the applicant’s mother.
·A three-page written submission dated 4 August 2025 (the 2025 Tribunal submission) written by the applicant’s representative and signed by the applicant.
·An Overseas Student Confirmation-of-Enrolment Certificate for a Certificate III in Painting and Decorating Course provided by Laneway Education which commenced in June 2024 and ends in June 2026. A brief letter from the Administration and Enrolment Coordinator at Laneway Education confirming applicant’s enrolment. A Transcript of Competency Record issued by Laneway Education in relation to the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating Course.
The Tribunal has considered all the material provided by the applicant.
Significantly, the documents provided by the applicant in 2025 including the Student Visa Information Form, the 2025 GTE statement and his 2025 Tribunal Submission indicated that the applicant was no longer enrolled in any business courses in Australia. Instead, these documents indicated he was now enrolled in a Certificate III in Painting and Decorating course that had commenced in June 2024.
The Tribunal has also obtained a movement record related to this applicant’s travel to Australia and his visa status, and a Provider Registration and International Student Management System (‘PRISMS’) record from the Department relating to the applicant’s study in Australia. PRISMS is a computer system used to receive and store information about overseas students and their study in Australia.
Application & Study
The Tribunal has considered the material provided by the applicant. The Tribunal accepts the applicant is a citizen of Nepal who arrived in Australia in July 2023. The Tribunal accepts that at the time he submitted his student visa application in November 2023, the applicant was enrolled in three business courses (Certificate II in Workplace Skills; Certificate III in Business & Diploma of Business).
The Student Visa Information Form submitted by the applicant in 2025 indicates that he never completed any of the business courses in which he had enrolled in 2023. The applicant’s 2025 GTE Statement and his 2025 Tribunal Submission also indicate the applicant did not complete any of the business-related courses he had enrolled in during 2023. The PRISMS record obtain by the Tribunal confirms the applicant did not complete any of these courses. The Tribunal accepts the applicant did not complete any of the three business related courses he had enrolled in during 2023.
Nevertheless, the applicant’s 2025 GTE Statement and his 2025 Tribunal Submission indicate that he has subsequently enrolled in a different course: Certificate III in Painting and Decorating. The applicant has provided an Overseas Student Confirmation-of-Enrolment Certificate for the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating which indicates that he is presently enrolled in the course. The PRISMS record supports the applicant’s claim of enrolment. The Tribunal accepts the applicant is presently enrolled in a Certificate III in Painting and Decorating that is being provided by laneway education.
Applicant’s Circumstances in Nepal
Direction 108 requires the Tribunal to consider the applicants circumstances in his home country. The applicant is a Nepalese citizen who was born in 2000. In Nepal, the applicant has the political and social rights associated with citizenship. He speaks Nepali and has cultural links to Nepalese society. The applicant completed his education in Nepal and lived there throughout his childhood. In Nepal he studied up to year 10. The Tribunal accepts the applicant has political, social and cultural ties to Nepal.
The applicant’s immediate family including his parents, and his brother and his brother’s wife all continue to reside in Nepal. According to the Student Visa Information Form the applicant maintains regular contact with his family in Nepal. The Tribunal accepts the applicant maintains ties with his family in Nepal.
The Tribunal notes that this applicant formerly worked as a professional footballer in Nepal and that he represented the Nepalese national football team. The Tribunal accepts the applicant has some public reputation in Nepal for this reason.
According to the applicant, he does not own property or significant assets in Nepal, however his family does. He has provided various documents showing the value of the family property and other financial assets in Nepal and asserts that he stands to inherit a share of that property. The Tribunal accepts the applicant’s family owns property in Nepal. The Tribunal accepts the applicant stands to inherit a share of the property. While the Tribunal accepts the applicant will inherit property and other assets in Nepal, the Tribunal is not satisfied that these assets, on their own, represent a significant incentive for him to return to Nepal.
In the applicant’s Student Visa Information Form he was asked to provide information about whether similar courses were available to him in his home country. The applicant indicated that there was trade training programs available in Nepal, such as a professional carpenter’s course, but that he felt the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating Course he had enrolled in Australia was superior in terms of its curriculum depth, accreditation and practical training standards. He expressed the view that Nepal’s vocational courses often lack formal certification, modern equipment, structured assessments, and workplace safety instruction. For these reasons, he indicated he preferred to study in Australia. The Tribunal has considered the applicant’s explanations about why he has not chosen to study in Nepal.
In his Student Visa Information Form and during his hearing, the applicant indicated that he did not have any concerns about returning to Nepal. He has indicated he does not have any concerns in relation to political or civil conflict in that country, nor does he have any outstanding military service obligations. He stated that he was intending to return to Nepal at the completion of his study in Australia.
Value of the applicant’s course of study
Direction 108 requires the Tribunal to consider the value of the applicant’s course of study in Australia to his future. As noted above this applicant has a year 10 education in Nepal. The applicant student visa application did not disclose any previous employment in Nepal. However, the student Visa information form indicated that he had worked as a professional footballer.
As noted earlier, when he first arrived in Australia the applicant enrolled in a series of business courses (Certificate II in Workplace Skills; a Certificate III in Business and a Diploma of Business). The applicant’s student Visa application also indicated his desire to work in the business sector. His 2023 GTE Statement outlined lengthy and detailed reasons for enrolling in business courses and his desire to work in the business sector upon return to Nepal. However, the Student Visa Information Form that he submitted in 2025 indicated that he did not complete any of his business courses and that he had subsequently enrolled in the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating. For reasons already provided, the Tribunal accepts the applicant is currently enrolled in the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating.
The applicant’s 2025 GTE Statement and his 2025 Tribunal Submission characterise the applicant’s decision to enrol in the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating as a conscience choice, reflecting a more realistic study plan for a person with the applicant’s level of prior education. However, during his hearing the applicant informed the Tribunal that the course provider (Albright Institute of Business) of the business studies courses he had enrolled in had informed him had advised him that he was unable to complete the business courses due to his lack of English language capability and his poor academic record. While these explanations are not contradictory, the Tribunal notes that it was only after he had been advised that he could not complete his business courses in Australia, that the applicant had enrolled in the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating.
During his hearing, the applicant indicated that during his previous life in Nepal, he had viewed painting as a hobby and had once painted for a festival in Nepal. Initially, he said he had some previously worked as a painter in Nepal and that his previous employment had informed his decision to study painting in Australia. However, during the hearing, the Tribunal noted that the applicant had not disclosed any previous employment as a painter in his student visa application, or in his Student Visa Information Form whereupon, the applicant changed his answer, and indicated that he had not worked as a painter previously in Nepal. The Tribunal found the applicant’s explanations for why he had enrolled in the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating to be shifting and unconvincing.
According to the student Visa information form upon completing his Certificate III in Painting and Decorating Course the applicant plans to return to Nepal and establish himself as a self-employed tradesperson. He says there is a high demand for such work in Nepal. He wants to start a small business offering painting and decorating services. The form indicates that he expects to earn approximately 700,000 NPR (approximately $7500 AUD) to 1000,000 NPR (approximately $10,000 AUD) annually in Nepal from his small business. His 2025 GTE Statement also indicates the expects to earn this much in Nepal. At his hearing, when his expectations about salary were discussed, the applicant indicated that having completed a formal qualification in Australia he would be able to demand his own price for his services in Nepal. The applicant has not provided any supporting evidence for his claims about the demand for renovation services in Nepal or his expectations about the salary he would earn in that country. Overall, the Tribunal found the applicant’s explanations about these issues to lack evidentiary support and to be unpersuasive.

The Tribunal has several concerns about the applicant’s current enrolment in the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating. The Tribunal accepts that there are genuine reasons that a person’s course of study may change, and Direction 108 indicates that decision-makers should allow for reasonable changes to career or study pathways. However, in the Tribunal’s view, there is a substantial difference between the applicant’s initial intention to study business in Australia, and his subsequent vocational training in the painting and decorating field. Though the applicant had submitted his student Visa application in November 2023, by mid-2024 he had enrolled in a completely different field of study. In the Tribunal’s view the applicant’s painting and decorating study is entirely unrelated to his previous intention to study business. The Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant’s enrolment in the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating was motivated by a conscience choice reflecting a more realistic study plan for a person with the applicant’s level of prior education. Rather, the Tribunal concludes the applicant enrolled in that course after he was advise that he could not complete his earlier business studies.
During the hearing the applicant’s representative cited the Transcript to indicate the applicant had failed several of his subjects in the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating during 2024 but asserted that in 2025 his study had improved, and he had not failed any subjects. The Tribunal notes that when asked about his study, the applicant indicated that his course only commenced six or seven months ago (i.e. around February or March 2025). However, the Overseas Student Confirmation-of-Enrolment Certificate provided by the applicant and his 2025 GTE Statement indicate that the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating course commenced in June 2024, around 14 months ago. In the Tribunal’s view the applicant’s inability to identify when his course had started or how much study he completed, was suggestive of a lack of engagement with his course of study.
In this context, the Tribunal notes that during his hearing the applicant was only able to provide brief and limited information about this course. When asked about what unit he was currently studying, he did not identify any of the subjects listed in his Transcript from laneway education or his 2025 GTE Statement (which listed all the subjects in his course) and could not identify his present unit of study. When asked what he was learning, he indicated that he was learning about removing furniture from a room before painting and returning the furniture to the room afterwards. The Tribunal considers the applicant was only able to demonstrate very superficial knowledge of his course of study.
Applicant’s Immigration History
Direction 108 requires the Tribunal to consider the applicants immigration history. This applicant arrived in Australia on a Temporary Entry Visa, and subsequently submitted his student Visa application (subject of this decision). He has not submitted any other visa applications in Australia.
According to the movement record obtained from the Department, the applicant’s Temporary Entry Visa was due to expire on 8 November 2023. The Tribunal notes the applicant submitted his student Visa application on 1 November 2023, before his temporary entry Visa had expired. For the avoidance of doubt, the Tribunal concludes the applicant did not breach the conditions of his Temporary Entry Visa.
He says he has not submitted Visa applications to any other country. The applicant has travelled overseas previously as part of his representative football duties for Nepal. According to the student Visa information form he travelled to the Philippines and to India on representative duties. There is no evidence before the Tribunal that the applicant failed to comply with the migration laws of the Philippines or India, or any other country. During his hearing, the applicant indicated that he had not applied for a Visa to any other country. These aspects of his immigration history are favourable.
The applicant’s Student Visa Information Form does not indicate he is currently employed in Australia, and his August 2025 GTE Statement indicates that he is not currently employed. Both documents indicated that his family was financially supporting him while he studied in Australia. His GTE Statement indicated that he budgeted carefully in order to ensure that he could complete his current course of study. Both his 2025 GTE Statement and his 2025 Tribunal submission indicate that he has complied with the conditions of his visas in Australia.
However, during his Tribunal hearing, the applicant disclosed that was employed in Australia and that he was in breach of visa conditions relating to his employment in this country. He stated that at present, he earned between $500-$600 per week from his employment in this country. He said he knew he was in breach of his visa conditions but asserted that he had to work in order to pay for his life in Australia. He said he hoped that the Tribunal would consider his disclosure of his employment in this country favourably, arguing that it was a demonstration of his honesty and reliability.
Overall, the Tribunal considers the applicant’s evidence about his breach of visa conditions to be concerning. Though the applicant disclosed his employment during his hearing, he had earlier provided evidence in writing that he had not been employed in Australia and was relying on financial support from his family. In the Tribunal’s view, the applicant has demonstrated his willingness to provide false and misleading evidence about his circumstances, and to breach his visa conditions.
Applicant’s Circumstances in Australia
Direction 108 requires the Tribunal to consider the applicants potential circumstances in Australia. During his hearing, the applicant indicated that in Australia he resides in shared rental accommodation with two other men. He indicated that one of these men is his maternal cousin. He said his cousin arrived in Australia around a year ago and was studying master’s degree in information technology. The applicant indicated that he did not have a partner and was not married in Australia the Tribunal is satisfied he has not entered into a relationship of concern for a student Visa outcome. Though the applicant does have a family connection to Australia (his cousin) the Tribunal is not satisfied that the presence of his cousin in Australia, on its own, would act as a significant incentive for him to stay.
As noted above, the Tribunal found the applicant’s knowledge of his present course of study to be superficial. The applicant did not know when he had started his present course, or his present unit of study and his representative indicated that he had failed numerous units of study in 2024.
The Tribunal is concerned about the applicant’s employment in Australia. According to his own evidence, this applicant presently earns between $26,000 AUD and $31,000 AUD per year. This is substantially more than his projected income in Nepal. In the Tribunal’s view, the applicant’s employment and earnings in Australia represent a significant incentive for him to stay in Australia.
There is another issue that concerns the Tribunal. The applicant’s Student Visa Information Form indicates that he intends to return to Nepal after he has completed his Certificate III in Painting and Decorating. During his hearing he also provided oral evidence that he intended to return after he completed the Certificate III in Painting and Decorating. However, during the same hearing, the applicant also indicated that he was considering further study in Australia. He said he was intending to enrol in a carpentry course at the same institution where is currently studying. He indicated that the carpentry course he intended to enrol in was scheduled to commence in June 2026 after is present course was finished.
While the Tribunal accepts that a person’s study preferences may change, in the Tribunal’s view the applicant’s shifting account of his plans at the completion of his current study were concerning. On its face, the applicant’s answers during his hearing suggests that he does not intend to return to Nepal at the completion of his current course of study as he had earlier stated in his hearing, and as had been reported in his Student Visa Information Form.
Conclusion
According to Direction 108, A successful student applicant must be both a genuine temporary entrant and a genuine student. 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.
The Tribunal has considered this applicant’s circumstances in Australia and in his home country, the value of her course of study to his future, and his immigration history. The applicant is a not a minor, nor has he submitted a Student Guardian application.
Direction 108 indicates that an application for a student 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 Tribunal has accepted that this applicant is presently enrolled in a vocational course of study in Australia (Certificate III in Painting and Decorating). The Tribunal has also accepted the applicant is a citizen of Nepal and that he has political, social, cultural and family ties to Nepal. The Tribunal accepts he is a footballer with a national reputation in Nepal. The Tribunal accepts that he stands to inherit a share of property and other assets from his family in Nepal. The Tribunal accepts that the applicant does not fear return to Nepal because of civil or political unrest or any other reasons and that he has no outstanding military service obligations. In the Tribunals view, all of these factors weigh in the applicant’s favour.
However, the Tribunal considers that the applicant’s willingness to breach his visa conditions, and to provide misleading written evidence about his employment to be concerning. The Tribunal considers the applicant to only have very limited knowledge and engagement with his current course of study, and notes that his current study of painting and decorating is substantially different from his original intention to study business courses in this country. Though the applicant indicated he was interested in painting because he had previously worked in that field in Nepal, he had not disclosed any previous employment, and he later retracted that claim. His answers about his previous employment in Nepal shifted when these issues were discussed with him. These factors weigh against the applicant.
In the Tribunals view, the applicant’s course of study in Australia has not been consistent. Though he has argued that his decision to transfer from business studies to painting and decorating was a deliberate choice, at hearing, the applicant indicated that his former education provider had informed him that he could not continue to study business because his English language skills, and his academic ability was not satisfactory. On the evidence before the tribunal the applicant only commenced studying painting and decorating after he had been told he could not continue to study business. In the Tribunal’s view, these factors suggest that the applicant may be using his student visa application to maintain ongoing residence in Australia.
Though the applicant provided oral and written evidence of his intention to return to Nepal in June 2026, after he completed his Certificate III in Painting and Decorating, he later indicated he was intending to study a further carpentry course in Australia. The Tribunal is not satisfied that he does intend to return to Nepal after he completes his present course.
The applicant is presently employed in Australia. On his own evidence, his present employment in Australia earns significantly more that his projected income in Nepal. In the Tribunals view, the applicant’s present earnings represent a significant incentive for him to stay in this country.
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).
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
The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.
Dates of hearing(s): 8 September 2025
Representative for the Applicant: Mr Adarsha Jung Pandey (MARN: 2217915)
Attachment – Direction No 108
DIRECTION NUMBER 108 – ASSESSING THE GENUINE TEMPORARY ENTRANT CRITERION FOR STUDENT VISA AND STUDENT GUARDIAN VISA APPLICATIONS
(Section 499)
I, CLARE O’NEIL, Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Cyber Security give this Direction under section 499 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
Dated:
Clare O’Neil

Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Cyber Security
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 - Preliminary
Name of Direction
This Direction is Direction No. 108 – Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa and Student Guardian visa applications.
It may be cited as Direction No. 108.
Commencement
This Direction commences on 23 March 2024.
Revocation
Direction No. 69, given under section 499 of the Act, is revoked.
Interpretation
Act means the Migration Act 1958.
Finally determined has the same meaning as is set out in subsections 5(9) and (9A) of the Act.
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 against the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications and Student Guardian visa applications (as applicable).
This Direction also applies to members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; or the Administrative Review Tribunal, upon its establishment; who review the decisions of primary decision-makers in relation to a Student visa or Student Guardian visa application.
This Direction applies in relation to Student visa applications and Student Guardian visa applications made before 23 March 2024 but not finally determined on that date, including such visa applications that are remitted from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; or the Administrative Review Tribunal, upon its establishment; or a Court.
The genuine temporary entrant criterion must be satisfied by all applicants who make an application for a Student visa and seek to satisfy the primary or secondary criteria, or an application for a Student Guardian visa and seek to satisfy the primary criteria.
Note: Direction No. 106 applies in relation to Subclass 500 (Student) visa applications and Student Guardian visa applications made on or after 23 March 2024, including visa applications made on or after that date that are remitted from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; or the Administrative Review Tribunal, upon its establishment; or a Court.
Preamble
The Australian Government operates a student visa program 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 program 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 – 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 or Student Guardian 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 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;
d)whether 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.
iii.b. Previous travels to Australia or other countries, including:
iv.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;
v.whether the applicant previously held a visa that was cancelled or considered for cancellation, and the associated circumstances;
vi.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
vii.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 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.