Wickramanayake (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, subclass 500. The applicant sought review of the delegate's decision to refuse to grant the visa. The primary dispute revolved around the applicant's alleged failure to provide adequate evidence of financial capacity, as required by clause 500.214(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994 and the associated Financial Capacity Instrument (LIN 19/198).

The court was required to determine whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to satisfy the financial capacity requirements for the subclass 500 visa. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the applicant had demonstrated genuine access to sufficient funds to cover course fees, living costs, and travel expenses for their intended stay in Australia, as well as the costs for any accompanying family members. This involved assessing the adequacy of the evidence provided in relation to the applicant's enrolment and financial resources.

The court reasoned that a Confirmation of Enrolment (COE) or other proof of enrolment is critical as it provides essential details regarding course commencement and conclusion dates, tuition costs, and amounts paid, all of which are elements of financial capacity. The applicant had declared holding a COE but failed to provide a copy or any other verification of enrolment to the Department. Consequently, the Tribunal gave no weight to this declaration. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant had been invited to provide documents to establish financial capacity, including proof of enrolment and evidence of funds, but had not done so adequately.

Accordingly, the Tribunal found that the applicant had not met the criteria for the grant of a subclass 500 (Student) visa. The decision under review was affirmed, meaning the visa was not granted.