Uong (Migration) - [2025] ARTA 1643

Uong (Migration) [2025] ARTA 1643 (21 July 2025)
DECISION AND
REASONS FOR DECISION
Applicant:Mr Minh Nhat Uong
Respondent:  Minister for Immigration and Citizenship
Tribunal Number:  2406290

Tribunal:General Member K Harvey
Place:Adelaide
Date: 21 July 2025
Decision:The decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa is affirmed.

General Member K Harvey

Statement made on 21 July 2025 at 1.19 pm
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine temporary entrant – incentives to depart or remain – wife, young children, property and business plans in home country – applied for student visas after arriving on visitor visa – unsatisfactory attendance in English course – enrolment at lower level and different subject area – reasonable knowledge of provider and course and satisfactory attendance and progress – reasons for studying in Australia – inconsistent evidence about employment or business – previous visa refusal for another country – decision under review affirmed
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2, cl 500.212(a)
STATEMENT OF REASONS
BACKGROUND

The applicant is a 41-year-old citizen of Vietnam. He arrived in Australia in August 2023 on a Visitor visa.
On 22 September 2023 he applied for the Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa. 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.
On 14 March 2024, a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs refused to grant the applicant the visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay temporarily in Australia as required by cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations).
This is a review of that decision.
Student visa application
The applicant applied for the Student visa to study a General English course (Beginner to Upper Intermediate) from September 2023 to November 2024.
The Department file before me relevantly includes the applicant’s visa application form, his birth certificate, extracts of his passport, the biodata page from his wife’s passport, his marriage certificate, his two children’s birth certificates, his car registration certificate, a certificate of land use right for a residence in Ho Chi Minh City, confirmation of his account balance, his certificate of overseas student health cover and a statement in support of his application.
The delegate considered a range of factors including the applicant’s circumstances in Vietnam and Australia, the value of the proposed course to his future and the applicant’s immigration history. The delegate noted the applicant’s spouse and children were declared as non-accompanying family members in the application and they may be eligible to apply to join the applicant in the future if he were granted the Student visa. The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant intended to genuinely stay in Australia temporarily and consequently did not meet cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 of the Regulations.
Evidence before the Tribunal
The applicant applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for a merits review of the delegate’s decision on 26 March 2024.
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, proceedings in the AAT that were not finalised before 14 October 2024 are to be continued and finalised by the Tribunal. Anything done in relation to the proceeding before 14 October 2024 is taken to have been done by the Tribunal.
In response to outreach from the Tribunal on 24 March 2025, the applicant submitted documents including copies of documents provided to the Department, Confirmation of Enrolment (CoE) statements for a Certificate IV in Kitchen Management and a Diploma in Hospitality Management, financial support information from his wife and mother, correspondence from Sydney College (the education provider) and a second certificate of land use right for land in Long An, Vietnam.
Prior to the hearing, the applicant provided written submissions and documents, including answers to the Tribunal’s Request for Student Visa Information form, correspondence from Sydney College including his academic results for his Certificate IV and a statement of current attendance, photographs from his course and a statement dated 19 June 2025 addressing his academic progress, rationale for study and provider selection, financial capacity and ties to his home country, future plans, compliance and that he is a ‘genuine temporary entrant’.
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 2 July 2025 via MS Teams video to give evidence and present arguments. The hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Vietnamese and English languages.
The applicant was assisted in relation to the review and his representative attended the hearing.
Following the hearing, the applicant provided a submission about his study history and four Certificates of Attainment and Attendance from Greenwich College for the General English course.
I also have before me records from the Provider Registration and International Student Management System (PRISMS) relating to the applicant’s enrolments.
For the following reasons, I consider the decision under review should be affirmed.
VISA CRITERIA AND RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS
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. The issue in this case is whether the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily in accordance with cl 500.212(a).
Clause 500.212(a) requires:
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
In considering whether the applicant satisfies cl 500.212(a), I 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 (the Direction). The Direction, which is attached to this decision, requires me 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 cl 500.212, also known as ‘the genuine temporary entrant criterion’.
EVIDENCE, FINDINGS AND REASONS
A number of factors weigh in favour of the grant of the Student visa. The applicant’s personal ties to Vietnam include that he is married, and his wife and two young children reside in Ho Chi Minh City with his parents. Regarding his economic circumstances, his wife and mother provided statutory declarations that they have the financial means to support the applicant while he is studying. The applicant and his wife own two properties, a building in Ho Chi Minh City and land in Long An. The Ho Chi Minh City property in which the applicant claims he wishes to open a western-style steak restaurant is currently leased for AUD2500 a month. The applicant said he wished to open restaurant selling steak, pasta and French cake where he would be both chef and manager. He spoke with confidence about his budgeting and plans. Further, the applicant explained he has no military service obligations, and he has not been affected by any political or civil unrest.
I have considered the circumstances of the applicant in Australia and I accept that there is no evidence he has entered into a relationship of concern. Further, he has a reasonable level of knowledge about his current course and his education provider.
However, other factors weigh against grant of the visa. In his application, the applicant explained his education and employment background, having studied a Diploma of Information Technology and run an internet-based business from home. He then worked as a Project Manager in security before moving into customer service roles with Citibank Vietnam and ANZ bank and finally working as a manager for a trading company. At the hearing, the applicant confirmed he had obtained a Diploma in Information Technology from the Industrial University in Ho Chi Minh City and claimed he had obtained a Bachelor of Arts in English from Ha Noi University in 2015. His studies in Australia are at a lower level than his studies in Vietnam and they are not consistent with his employment in Vietnam.
I recognised that applicants’ plans may change and that decision makers should allow for reasonable changes in career or study pathways. However, the applicant’s professed reasons for undertaking the studies have changed significantly over time and I did not find his explanation for the changes to be reasonable. He provided an undated written statement with his visa application in which he explains his motivation for studying English in Australia. He explained while on holidays in Australia, he started to wonder why he shouldn’t take advantage of the opportunity to advance his English language skills as English is an important global language and also in the context of his career aspirations in finance and banking. In the statement provided with his visa application, the applicant claimed with his fluent English skills acquired in Australia, he would continue to work in the financial profession and apply for roles as a Customer Relationship Executive with one of the large international companies in Ho Chi Minh City such as Woori Bank, Citi Bank or HSBC Bank. However, in his pre-hearing submission and at the hearing, the applicant claimed to have a long-term plan to establish a western-style restaurant in Vietnam.
As discussed at the hearing, the applicant’s PRISM record shows that he enrolled in a 14-month General English Course from 11 September 2023. His record also shows he notified cessation of his studies in the General English Course on 2 April 2024. The applicant explained he needed to ensure that his English was good enough to understand the teacher and have conversations with his classmates, which is why he studied English. He claimed he did not enrol directly at Sydney College as he wanted to improve his English proficiency.
When asked why he claimed in the application that he wished to keep working in finance on his return but was now studying a Certificate IV in Kitchen Management and was enrolled in a Diploma of Hospitality Management, which was not consistent with his application, the applicant claimed that it was a mistake in his Student visa application. He said the finance work is no longer a good life like before. When asked about the claimed mistake, he said when he applied, he was not so confident that he could open a western-style restaurant but after he studied, he has a lot of confidence that he can. I put to him that he said he wanted to work in finance when he returned to Vietnam and the applicant said that was the first time he applied for the visa. (I note the applicant has only made one application for a Student visa in Australia.) Afterwards, he did not want to work in the finance area and he did not want to be an employee. He claims he really wants to open a restaurant so he can be the owner.
I am also concerned that the applicant’s reasons for not studying in Vietnam are not reasonable, considering his change in study. In his application, the applicant claimed he had studied English at school and at the ILA English centre but he was unsatisfied with his language proficiency, which led him to believe English courses in Vietnam were inadequate. I accept that studying a language while living amongst native speakers can provide an immersive experience that can accelerate one’s learning. However, the applicant terminated his General English course and his current course of study is in kitchen management and hospitality management.
The applicant claimed in his statement to the Tribunal that he had undertaken thorough research into culinary education options in Vietnam and Australia. When asked what hospitality courses he considered in Vietnam, the applicant replied that Vietnamese food is mainly oriental food influenced from China and there is no college to specialise in teaching to cook western-style food. When asked what courses he considered, the applicant said there were only two colleges that teach how to cook and their certificates are not recognised worldwide. When asked why he did not study in Vietnam, the applicant repeated that there was no school or college about how to cook western food at all, so he didn’t study there. I explained that a simple search shows there are more than two western-style culinary courses in Vietnam. The applicant reiterated that their certificates are not recognised worldwide and he wished to proudly promote that he was fully trained in Australia. In the pre-hearing submission, he claimed that western ingredients were hard to find in Ho Chi Minh City and when asked to explain, he said it was the ingredients to make sauce that you eat with steak. He said you can buy the ingredients but he needed to come to Australia to learn to cook steak and make ‘gravy sauce’. The applicant claimed his lawyer could send the information about his research however no information about the research was provided in the post-hearing submissions. The applicant’s lack of awareness of culinary courses in Vietnam that teach western-style cookery and the lack of evidence of research undertaken weighs against the grant of the visa.
The applicant provided evidence that he has completed more than 50 per cent of the Certificate IV in Kitchen Management with an attendance rate of 95 per cent and I accept that he is progressing in these studies. At the hearing, the applicant claimed he attended his General English course regularly and has a certificate of attendance. In the post-hearing submission, the representative provided ‘additional evidence of the applicant’s genuine and continuous study history in Australia’, claiming ‘he maintained consistent attendance and satisfactory progress’. However, the four certificates show that the applicant’s attendance at the General English course was unsatisfactory for 23 of the 25 weeks.[1] I find that the applicant’s unsatisfactory attendance for the vast majority of his General English course is another factor that weighs against the grant of the visa.
[1] The four Greenwich College certificates report the applicant’s attendance, where unsatisfactory attendance is 0-79 per cent and satisfactory attendance 80–100 per cent, as follows:
·11/09/2023–1/12/2023 12-week pre-intermediate course, actual attendance 64 per cent
·1/1/2024–5/1/2024 1-week pre-intermediate course, actual attendance 100 per cent
·8/1/2024– 12/01/2024 1-week pre-intermediate course, actual attendance 80 per cent
·8/1/2024–22/3/2024 11-week intermediate course, actual attendance 70 per cent.
There are factors in the applicant’s immigration history that weigh for and against the visa grant. Factors that weigh for the grant include his attendance record for his current course and that there is no evidence before me that the applicant has previously been refused a visa to Australia. However, he was refused a visa to France in 2023. In his application, he disclosed that ‘the reason for refusal of [the] France visa was the information submitted regarding the justification for the purpose and conditions of the intended stay was not reliable.’ At the hearing, he advised he had applied to go to France in March or April 2023 and, while he could not remember exactly when he was refused, he thought it was about a month later. The applicant’s current attendance and course progress weighs in favour of granting the visa, however, I find that his immigration history in total, including his unsatisfactory attendance for the majority of his General English course and the visa refusal from France, weighs against the visa grant.
The applicant is not a minor and so the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse do not apply, and no other relevant matters were identified.
Conclusion
Considering the circumstances of the applicant overall, I accepted that he is undertaking his Certificate IV studies and has completed more than 50 per cent of the course. I also accept that his circumstances in Vietnam are favourable to the visa grant. However, I am not satisfied that he has reasonable reasons for studying in Australia, and his education is at a lower level that his existing qualifications and it is not consistent with his employment. The applicant’s changed study plans and changed career plans appear contrived and, with his lack of research about courses in Vietnam, appear designed to maintain ongoing residence in Australia. On the basis of the above discussion of evidence, findings and reasons regarding the applicant’s intentions, and having regard to the factors specified in Direction 108, I am not satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. Accordingly, the applicant does not meet cl 500.212(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Weighing up all of the available evidence, I am not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.
Given the above findings, I find 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: 2 July 2025
Representative for the Applicant: Mr Ngoc Phuoc Nguyen (MARN: 1806068)
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.