Susanti (Migration) - [2025] ARTA 398

SUSANTI (MIGRATION) [2025] ARTA 398 (24 MARCH 2025)
DECISION AND
REASONS FOR DECISION
Applicant:Ms Susanti
Respondent:  Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
Tribunal Number:  2313896

Tribunal: General MemberS Muling
Place:Melbourne
Date: 24 March 2025
Decision:The decision under review is affirmed.

Statement made on 24 March 2025 at 11:41am
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Subclass TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine temporary entrant – incentives to depart or remain – no study or work since high school – Cert IV completed and enrolment in diploma confirmed but no evidence of course progress – general future work plans but no evidence of confirmed employment opportunity – husband and adult children in home country and no evidence of strong ties in Australia – decision under review affirmed
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 500.212(a)
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 22 August 2023 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 is a 50-year-old female from Indonesia. She applied for the visa on 9 June 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 they were not satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay temporarily in Australia.
The applicant applied for review of the delegate’s decision on 7 September 2023.
On 14 October 2024, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (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.
On 11 February 2025, the applicant was notified to appear before the Tribunal on 27 February 2025.
On 17 February 2025, the applicant provided written notice that she would not participate in the hearing and requested the Tribunal make a decision on the papers without holding a hearing. The Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s representative on 20 February 2025 seeking to clarify whether the applicant intended to participate in the scheduled hearing as the applicant’s phone number and email address were also provided in the ‘Response to Hearing Notice’ form. The applicant’s representative responded on the same day to confirm that the applicant will not participate in the hearing and was requesting the Tribunal make a decision on the papers. The Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s representative on 21 February 2025 to confirm that the scheduled hearing had been cancelled and a decision would be made in due course.
The circumstances in which the Tribunal may make a decision without a hearing are outlined in section 106 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (ART Act) which includes where an applicant requests the Tribunal to make its decision without holding a hearing of the proceeding and it appears to the Tribunal that the issues for determination in the proceeding can be adequately determined in the applicant’s absence (s 106(3) ART Act).
The issue the Tribunal is required to determine as part of the review is whether the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student. The Tribunal has before it a copy of the Department’s file which includes a copy of the applicant’s student visa application form and information she submitted in support of her application. The Tribunal invited the applicant to complete a ‘Request for Student Visa Information’ form which was returned on 25 November 2024, together with additional written and documentary material. Based on the information before it, the Tribunal is satisfied that the issue for determination, as outlined above, can be adequately determined in the applicant’s absence.
On the information before it, as discussed above, the Tribunal accepts that the applicant has requested, and consents to, the Tribunal making its decision without holding the hearing. The Tribunal has therefore exercised its discretion to determine the matter on the information before it, without taking any further steps to enable the applicant to appear before it.
Student visa application and evidence to the Department
The applicant applied for a student visa to study in Australia’s Vocational Education and Training Sector. In her visa application, the applicant stated that her husband and two children are living in Indonesia. She completed Year 12 and described her employment status as “other” and housewife. The applicant visited Taiwan from 21 November 2022 to 19 December 2022.
Attached to the application form was a genuine temporary entrant (GTE) statement made by the applicant, in which she provided the following information, in summary:
·She decided to study a leadership and management course because she wants to find a job in that area in her home country, such as Training and Development Manager or Purchasing Manager.
·She chose to study leadership and management because she wants to get the skills, knowledge and qualifications necessary to acquire a higher-level position.
·The course will help her gain in-depth knowledge and understanding of core elements of leadership and a great introduction into the world since she has no prior experience.
·After researching information about New Cambridge College Sydney (NCCS) and consulting with her agent, she received positive advice about them. She chose NCCS because they are one of the leading vocational education providers in Sydney and has been the preferred choice for international students for nearly 10 years.
·She chose to study in Australia because she wanted to study abroad and improve her English language skills, as well as gain new life experience. She researched other western countries such as US, UK and Canada but preferred to study in Australia because Australian institutions have clearer frameworks and provide quality research and effective teaching standards, making them one of the global leaders in education. Australia is also located closer to Indonesia, making it easier for her to meet her family, and the weather is similar to Indonesia.
·Institutions such as BINUS and Kalbis Institute offer similar vocational courses but after researching their course content and subjects, she found the program is not really focused on the course and believes it would be a waste of time.
·After she graduates she will find a job in well-known companies in Indonesia such as Traveloka, Gojek, Tokopedia and Pertamina.
Evidence to the Tribunal
In response to the Tribunal’s request for further information on 11 November 2024, the applicant provided a completed ‘Request for Student Visa Information’ form which included the following relevant information, in summary:
·She completed Year 12 in 1993.
·Her main work experience before arriving in Australia was housewife.
·She travelled to Taiwan from 21 November 2022 to 19 December 2022.
·She completed the Certificate IV in “Leadership Management” and is currently studying a Diploma of “Leadership Management” which ends in October 2025.
·Her son and daughter are in Indonesia.
·She has a house and personal savings in Indonesia.
Attached to the form were the following supporting documents:
·Statement made by the applicant addressing concerns raised in the delegate’s decision.
·Bank statement in the applicant’s name dating from October 2024.
·Confirmation letter from New Cambridge College Sydney dated 15 November 2024.
·Certificate of completion and academic transcript for the Certificate IV in Leadership and Management.
·Land title document in the applicant’s husband’s name.
·Untranslated documents.
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 is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student.
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.
The applicant has provided evidence that she completed a Certificate IV in Leadership and Management in October 2024. She is enrolled in a Diploma of Leadership and Management which had a start date of 28 October 2024 and an expected completion date of 26 October 2025. The applicant provided a letter dated 15 November 2024 from NCCS confirming that she had commenced her Diploma course however, there is no evidence before the Tribunal regarding her progress to date.
The Tribunal notes that the applicant completed Year 12 in 1993 and did not undertake any further formal study. While the Tribunal accepts that the proposed courses are consistent with the applicant’s current level of education, there is nothing in the information provided by the applicant to indicate why she made the decision to return to study 30 years after she completed high school. Although the applicant has discussed in general terms her desire to secure a higher-level position in Indonesia, she has not elaborated in any detail as to the reasoning behind her seeking to upskill and enter the workforce at this time, particularly in light of the fact that she has not declared having any employment at all in that past in Indonesia.
In the applicant’s GTE statement attached to her student visa application she stated that she decided to undertake a leadership and management course because she wants to find a job in that area in her home country, such as Training and Development Manager or Purchasing Manager. The applicant has not articulated the basis for her interest in securing this type of employment, as opposed to some other position in a different field (noting that the applicant has no specific previous work experience). In the written answers provided to questions in the Tribunal’s ‘Request for Student Visa Information’ form, the applicant explained that she chose to study the Certificate IV and Diploma of Leadership and Management because leadership and management skills are critical for effectively running and expanding her business in Indonesia. However, in the same form the applicant stated that her main work experience before arriving in Australia was housewife. Similarly, in her student visa application, the applicant did not provide the details of any employment in Indonesia, describing her employment status as “other” and identifying herself as a housewife. In light of the applicant’s evidence that she has not had any paid employment in Indonesia and was a housewife, and nothing before the Tribunal to suggest that either she or her family had any business in Indonesia, the Tribunal finds her claims regarding the leadership and management course providing her with the skills to contribute to the growth and success of hers and her family’s business (as she has variably described) perplexing and somewhat unconvincing. The applicant has also claimed in the statement that she provided the Tribunal that upon completing her studies she intends to accept a confirmed employment opportunity as an Operational Leader beginning in 2026. She has not provided any further information regarding this particular position, particularly the name of the company or organisation she would allegedly be working for or how she came to be offered this opportunity (particularly in light of the fact she appears to have no previous employment experience in Indonesia). The Tribunal finds the applicant’s evidence, as discussed above, regarding the relevance and value of the course to her proposed future employment to be somewhat inconsistent and problematic.
The applicant has provided some information regarding research she claimed to have conducted in deciding to study in Australia and at NCCS, including courses available in other Western countries such as the UK, US and Canada and vocational courses on offer in Indonesia at institutions such as BINUS and Kalbis Institute.
The Tribunal notes that in the applicant’s student visa application form she included her husband and two children as non-accompanying members of her family unit. In the ‘Request for Student Visa Information’ form, the applicant did not include her husband in the question asking for details of her family which raises doubts that she is still in a relationship with her husband. Further, she claimed to only be in contact with her children. The applicant’s children are aged 22 and 20. While the applicant claimed in her statement submitted to the Tribunal that her children are enrolled in schools in Indonesia as a reason why her children will remain in Indonesia and not apply as subsequent entrants to join her at a later date, the applicant has not provided any details regarding what their current circumstances are including what they are currently studying. Apart from her immediate family members, the applicant has not declared ties to Indonesia in the form of her parents and siblings. The applicant has indicated that she was part of a church community in Jakarta, which she used to attend every Sunday. She also refers to professional ties she has cultivated in Indonesia yet as discussed above, the applicant has not declared that she has had any employment in Indonesia. The Tribunal accepts that the applicant’s children residing in Indonesia would provide some incentive for her to return there once she has finished her studies. However, given the age of the applicant’s children, it is not satisfied that it presents as a significant incentive for her to return to Indonesia.
The Tribunal has limited information about the applicant’s economic circumstances in Indonesia. Whilst the applicant indicated in the ‘Request for Student Visa Information’ form that amongst her assets is a house, the applicant provided a title document which states that her husband is the title holder (the applicant provided a number of other documents which were untranslated). There appears to be nothing before the Tribunal to suggest the applicant owns any property herself. The applicant also stated that she has savings, and she provided a copy of a bank statement for an account in her name. However, the Tribunal notes that this statement is dated October 2024, and that the applicant’s savings could be used in Australia. The Tribunal does not find the applicant’s economic circumstances present as a significant incentive for her to return to Indonesia.
The Tribunal also has limited information about the applicant’s circumstances in Australia. She has claimed to have community ties here through her attendance at an Indonesian Church in Sydney, where she has made friends. The applicant has not provided any information about her living arrangements in Australia. There is no evidence before the Tribunal to suggest the applicant has any ties which would present as a strong incentive to remain in Australia.
In the ‘Request for Student Visa Information’ form, the applicant has stated her annual living expenses are $13,200 a year. The applicant claimed she is able to support herself with the support and savings of her family however the applicant has provided little information regarding her family’s financial position. Further, the applicant has only declared her husband and two children and no other family members and as discussed above, in the more recent information she provided in the ‘Request for Student Visa Information’ form she has omitted her husband raising questions about the status of their marriage.
The Tribunal has taken into consideration the fact the applicant travelled to Australia in June 2023 on a tourist visa. The Tribunal has some concern about the circumstances in which she came to apply for the current student visa, in that she arrived in Australia on a tourist visa and then once onshore, applied for the visa, which suggests an intention to take this course of action prior to travelling here or a decision made without much contemplation or planning. While the Tribunal accepts it is possible that an applicant may change their plans and seek to further their skills and knowledge for employment purposes, considering the applicant’s circumstances, it has difficulty accepting the applicant made the decision to continue her education only after travelling to Australia as a tourist.
There is no information before the Tribunal to suggest that the applicant has military obligations or that there is civil or political unrest in Indonesia. The Tribunal also does not have any information to suggest the applicant has been refused visas in other countries or that she has not complied with migration laws.

Taking into account all the material before it, and the considerations above, while the Tribunal finds that there is no evidence before it to suggest that there are any incentives for the applicant to stay in Australia and that she has maintained enrolment in the courses identified in her visa application and completed the Certificate IV as planned, it is concerned by her evidence regarding her future goals, particularly how she plans to use the skills obtained in the courses in Indonesia, and her ties in Indonesia. Having regard to the applicant’s circumstances, her immigration history and all other relevant matters, 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).
The Tribunal is therefore not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl 500.212.
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.
Representative for the applicant: Mr Rionaldo Prabowo
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.