Tommi (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Tommi, an applicant for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay in Australia temporarily as a student, as required by clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994. The applicant's wife and child were also applicants, seeking to satisfy secondary criteria.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant met the genuine temporary entrant criteria, which involves assessing whether the applicant genuinely intends to stay in Australia temporarily and intends to comply with visa conditions. In making this assessment, the Tribunal had regard to Direction No. 69, which outlines various factors to consider, including the applicant's circumstances in their home country and in Australia, their immigration history, and the value of the proposed course of study to their future.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant had established ongoing family ties in Indonesia, including other family members and property. While the applicant's wife and child were in Australia with him, and he had returned to Indonesia multiple times since 2010, the Tribunal placed weight on these established ties to his home country. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's stated intention for his child to be raised in Indonesia with the benefit of family relationships. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the primary criteria for a genuine temporary entrant.

Consequently, as the primary applicant failed to meet the necessary criteria, the secondary applicants, his wife and child, were also unable to satisfy the requirements for the visa. The Tribunal affirmed the decisions not to grant the applicants Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas.