Suvorratrai (Migration)

[2021] AATA 2325

Suvorratrai (Migration) [2021] AATA 2325 (5 May 2021)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Mr Sontaya Suvorratrai

CASE NUMBER:  1927996

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):         BCC2019/4126954

MEMBER:D Triaca

DATE:5 May 2021

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

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

Statement made on 05 May 2021 at 1:58pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION –Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – subclass 500 (Student) visa – not a genuine temporary entrant –  further marketing study is available to him in home country –use the student migration program to maintain ongoing residence – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 499
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cl 500.212

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 25 September 2019 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 20 August 2019. 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.

3. 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 (the Regulations).

4. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 12 March 2021 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Thai and English languages.

5. The applicant was assisted in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.

6. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

7. 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.

   Genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student (cl.500.212)

8. 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?

9. In considering whether the applicant satisfies cl.500.212(a), the Tribunal must have regard to Direction No.69, ‘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.

10. 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.

11. This is made plain from the following statement of Logan J in Kumar v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2020) FCAFC 16 at [4], ‘Of course the Minister’s directions were a relevant consideration. How could it be otherwise in light of s 499 of the Act? But they were guidelines. Reading them as a whole, the Minister did not purport to elevate them beyond that, only to offer guidance to the end of consistency in public administration. Moreover, as Derrington and Thawley JJ explain, the Minister explicitly counselled against a mechanical, “checklist” approach. He recognised that factors might not be all one way; hence his reference to, “on balance”. All this was done in respect of a visa eligibility for which has as a criterion a subject which inherently involves, “a matter of opinion or policy or taste” in terms of satisfaction as to whether an applicant is a genuine student.’

12. Whilst not defined in the Regulations, the word genuine may be taken to mean ‘authentic, real or true’ in according with its ordinary and natural meaning. The Regulations specify two constituent elements of a genuine student visa applicant. First, a genuine applicant is one who intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. The applicant must demonstrate an intention to stay in Australia for a limited time only, not permanently. That intention must be unqualified. This requirement reflects the temporary nature of being a student.[1] Secondly, a ‘genuine applicant’ is a person who intends to comply with any conditions to which the visa may be subject.[2]

    [1] See Singh [2019] (Migration) AATA 2993 at [13]

    [2] See the discussion of the meaning of ‘genuine applicant’ in Vu Vu (Migration) [2019] AATA 5740 (18 December 2019) [22] – [25] upheld on appeal in Vu Vu & Ors v Minister for Immigration and anor [2020] FCCA 2292

13. The issues in this case arose in the following circumstances, the applicant is a 33 year old citizen of Thailand. He first arrived in Australia on in 2014. He arrived here in 2014 as a dependent on a student visa held by his ex-wife. He was granted a further dependent student visa in 2016 and that visa ceased in August 2019. He separated from his wife at some stage in 2019 and he applied for a student visa on 25 August 2019. On 25 September 2019 a delegate of the Department refused his application (delegate’s decision). He subsequently applied to the tribunal for a review of the delegates decision and he provided the tribunal with a copy of that decision.

14. The tribunal has concluded that the decision to refuse the applicant a student visa ought to be affirmed in this case, for the reasons which are set out below. In reaching its decision, the tribunal has had regard to:

    (a)The delegate’s decision record;

    (b)The applicant’s original written visa application;

    (c)The oral evidence and arguments of the applicant presented at the hearing;

    (d)All written material filed by or on behalf of the applicant in relation to this case;

    (e)Other relevant documents on the Tribunal and Department files;

    (f)Certification of enrolment and offer from Mercury College;

    (g)Applicant’s written response to the tribunal’s invitation to provide further information pursuant to s.359(2) of the Act.

    (h)Applicant’s written statement of Genuine Temporary Entrant Criterion 8 March 2021.

15. The applicant has resided in Australia since 2014 on dependent visas and associated bridging visas. During that time, he says he supported his ex-wife. He says he has worked throughout this time as a cook at the Sian Corporation. He provided a copy of his pay evidence from that organisation. I accept he has done so, notwithstanding the delegate’s decision refers to him has having been unemployed since 2014. He studied online courses in Thailand between 2015 and 2017 completing a Vocational Certificate in Business Administration majoring in Accounting.

16. In 2019 he commenced studying in Australia. He undertook English courses at Mercury College completing this course in April 2020. He commenced a Certificate IV in Marketing and Communication at Mercury College and is very close to completing this course in April 2021. He intends to commence a Diploma of Marketing & Communication at Mercury on 22 May 2021 and due to be completed on 22 May 2022. He provided a copy of his offer from Mercury. He has not accepted it at this stage.

17. The applicant provided evidence from Mercury confirming he has made good progress in the Certificate IV in Marketing Communication and is expected to complete this course on schedule on 25 April 2021. He appears to have applied himself to his studies and made academic progress. He has completed 83% of the course and has an attendance rate of 100%. These matters are in his favour, as is the fact that he applied himself to his studies notwithstanding the delegate’s decision and the uncertainty surrounding the outcome of this application.

18. The applicant plans to return home to Thailand at the completion of his studies and start a food delivery business in his home town. His plans are reasonably well-developed and he provided details of his research and business plan in his GTE Statement. These matters are in his favour. I consider that irrespective of the outcome of this application, he will have the opportunity to complete the Certificate IV course given the proximity of the completion date. The applicant will have the opportunity to remain here for a period on Bridging Visa E in order to finalise arrangements and should be able to complete that course. The real question on this application is whether the applicant will benefit from the completion of a Diploma of Marketing and Communication.

19. Having regard to all the evidence, I consider the applicant is unlikely to derive much benefit from completing the Diploma course. I do not consider he has demonstrated why further study in Australia is necessary for him to return home and commence preparations for his food delivery company. The reasons for this are as follows.

20. First, inferentially, the applicant has a reasonable understanding of business and marketing having completed a Vocational Certificate of Business Administration from Thailand and being very close to completing a Certificate IV in Marketing and Communication. Secondly, the applicant intends to open his own business. He is not intending to enter a competitive job market in which holding a higher-level qualification may give him some advantage. Third, when asked how the proposed study will assist him in the future, he said that he was interested in the subject of social media marketing that he would undertake in the Diploma course. I accept he may wish to undertake further study in a specific aspect of social media marketing. However, I consider that if the applicant requires some specific further training in aspects of social media, he ought to be able to pursue those skills and knowledge in an online environment or in his home country. In his 359 Response he states that ‘I trust that there are many marketing courses in my home country’. Accordingly, I consider that further marketing study is available to him if he requires it.

21. In the circumstances, I do not consider the applicant has demonstrated there is any real value in remaining in Australia for a further 12 months for the purpose of completing the Diploma. I do not consider the proposed further study is likely to improve his employment prospects in his home country or a third country. It follows that I do not consider the proposed further study is likely to increase the applicant’s remuneration in his home country.

22. I do not consider the applicant has advanced reasonable reasons for not studying in Thailand. He says that there are marketing courses available to him there. I accept that he may prefer to study in Australia as he says that Australia he believes Australian marketing courses are ‘more up to date’ but I regard this as a bare assertion in the absence of objective evidence to this effect.

23. The applicant’s reasoning of studying in Australia is also to improve his English language skills. I consider that that may have been relevant at the time of the application. However, at this stage, the applicant has completed an English language course and had the benefit of living in an English speaking society for over 5 years. I do not consider that there is any evidence to suggest he requires further time in Australia for the purpose of improving his English.

24. I accept the applicant has a reasonable understanding of living in Australia. This is to be expected given the length of time he has resided here. Similarly, he has a reasonable understanding of his course and course provider. I am not surprised by this as he has already completed one course at Mercury and is close to completing a second. These matters weigh marginally in his favour.

25. There is no evidence in relation to the applicant’s circumstances in his home country relative to others there.

26. The applicant states, and the Tribunal accepts that he has no concerns in relation to political or civil unrest in his home country.

27. The applicant states, and the Tribunal accepts, that he has no concerns in relation to military service commitments in his home country.

28. The applicant declared his family in Thailand to be his parents and sister. He has another sister in South Korea. He is in regular contact with his family via telephone and social media. He has travelled to Thailand on two occasions since arriving here. In all the circumstances, I consider the applicant appears to be managing his family relationships via telephone and social media. Whilst I take into account that the applicant is the only son in the family and states he has to return home to care for his parents, the reality is that he has not yielded to these ties for many years and is seeking to further extend his stay. In circumstances in which the applicant has resided outside his home country for over a decade, having lived and worked in Taiwan and Bangladesh for approximately 5 years prior to arriving here, I do not consider these personal or family ties operate as a significant incentive for him to return home.

29. There is no specific evidence to suggest the applicant has family or personal ties to Australia that may operate as a strong incentive for him to remain here.

30. The applicant works in Australia as a cook at the Terrace Thai Restaurant, employed by the Siam Corporation. He says that he works approximately 20 hours per week and provided evidence that he earned $19,668 AUD in 2019-20 and has earned $13,590 in the current financial year. He says his family owns land in Thailand. I accept his evidence in this regard. However, I do not consider overseas held property operates as an incentive for the applicant to return. Such property may be readily sold or retained and utilised to produce income. Neither scenario requires the physical presence of the applicant. I do not consider the mere fact of the applicant’s employment in Australia is likely to operate as a significant incentive for him to remain here. He is earnings are not significant, especially taking into account the higher cost of living in Australia. Accordingly, I do not consider economic factors operate as a significant incentive for the applicant to remain here.

31. However, I do place some weight on the fact that the applicant appears to be comfortable and settled in Australia. Whilst his earnings may not be significant, I consider that the fact he has stable, long term employment in Australia may operate as an incentive for him to seek to extend his time here. I also consider that returning home to Thailand after over six years is likely to cause some upheaval in his life and he may wish to postpone or avoid that event. These matters weigh against the application.

32. The applicant has travelled between Australia and Thailand without any issues. He has also lived and worked in Taiwan and Bangladesh for extended periods without any issues. He appears to have complied with the visa conditions since arriving here. In the circumstances I make no adverse findings in relation to his travel or immigration history.

33. I also take into account that the applicant appears to have good employment prospects, irrespective of whether or not he undertakes further study. In addition to his good work history here in Australia, he has worked in factories in Taiwan and Bangladesh as a Production Co-Ordinator. I consider his work experience ought to hold him in good stead to return home and find suitable employment. This weighs against the application.

34. Furthermore, I also take into account the fact that the applicant has resided in Australia since 2014, yet it was only upon the expiration of his dependent visa that he chose to attempt to study here. This suggests that the motivation for his application for a student visa was to extend his stay in Australia rather than the educational benefits of the course. I consider that he had had ample opportunity to complete courses such as the Diploma of Marketing and Communication since arriving here if he chose. This weighs against the application.

35. There do not appear to be any other matters relevant to the application.

36. I have considered all the evidence before the tribunal. I do not consider the applicant to be a genuine applicant. Whilst he has applied himself to his studies in recent times, this does not allay my underlying concern that his motivations for the application are to maintain an ongoing residence in Australia. I do not consider he requires the benefit of a Diploma in order to return home and embark upon his proposed career and given his work experience I consider he will be well placed to find employment upon his return home. In all the circumstances the application should be refused.

37. One further matter. Nothing in these reasons should be taken to mean that the applicant should not be given the opportunity to complete his current Certificate IV in Marketing and Communication. In this regard I note that the applicant is due to complete this course in a matter of weeks.

38. 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).

39. Accordingly, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl.500.212.

40. 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

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

    D Triaca
    Member

    Attachment – Direction No.69

    DIRECTION NUMBER 69 – ASSESSING THE GENUINE TEMPORARY ENTRANT CRITERION FOR STUDENT VISA AND STUDENT GUARDIAN VISA APPLICATIONS

    (Section 499)

    I, PETER DUTTON, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection give this Direction under section 499 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

    Dated: 18 April 2016

    Peter Dutton

    
    

    Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

    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 of Direction No. 69 - Preliminary

    Name of Direction

    This Direction is Direction No. 69 - Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa and Student Guardian visa applications.

    It may be cited as Direction No. 69.

    Commencement

    This Direction commences on 1 July 2016.

    Interpretation

    Act means the Migration Act 1958.

    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’s temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications in Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    This Direction also applies to members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal who review the decisions of primary decision-makers in relation to a Student visa or a Student Guardian visa application.

    The genuine temporary entrant criterion must be satisfied by all applicants who make an application for either a Student visa seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for a Student Guardian visa.

    Preamble

    The Australian Government operates a student visa programme 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 programme 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 of Direction No. 69 - 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.

    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 Subclass 500 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;

    dwhether 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.

    b.Previous travels to Australia or other countries, including:

    i.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;

    ii.whether the applicant previously held a visa that was cancelled or considered for cancellation, and the associated circumstances;

    iii.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

    iv.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 Subclass 500 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.