WANG (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to refuse to grant the applicant, a 30-year-old Chinese citizen, a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The delegate’s refusal was based on the applicant’s alleged failure to demonstrate substantial economic or personal ties to China, a limited immigration history in China, and an inability to detail how the proposed course of study would enhance his career prospects there. The applicant had arrived in Australia in March 2010 and, by the time of the application in August 2017, had completed several qualifications in business and accounting, and was enrolled in a Master of Professional Accounting course.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, as required by clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations 1994. This required the Tribunal to be satisfied that the applicant genuinely intended to stay in Australia temporarily, intended to comply with visa conditions, and that any other relevant matters supported his genuineness. The Tribunal considered the applicant's circumstances, including his academic records, employment history in Australia, property ownership in China, and an offer of employment in China as an Investment Manager, which he stated required the Master's qualification.

The Tribunal found that the applicant’s stated need for the Master of Professional Accounting degree to secure the Investment Manager position in China was credible and indicated the course had significant value to his future. While acknowledging concerns about the applicant's limited visits to China since 2011, the Tribunal determined these were outweighed by other factors. The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant intended to comply with visa conditions, noting no past non-compliance and his stated intention to adhere to them.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration. This decision was based on the Tribunal's satisfaction that the applicant met the criteria under clause 500.212, specifically that he intended genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily and intended to comply with visa conditions.