Yang (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant the applicant a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The Tribunal, presided over by Wendy Banfield, was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the visa, specifically whether they were enrolled in a full-time registered course of study at the time of the decision.

The central legal issue was the interpretation and application of clause 500.211(a) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations, which mandates that an applicant for a Subclass 500 visa must be enrolled in a course of study at the time of the decision. A "course of study" is defined as a "full-time registered course," and a "registered course" is one provided by an institution registered under the *Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000* (Cth). The Tribunal considered the role of the Provider Registration and International Student Management System (PRISMS) as the official record for such enrolments, noting it is a business record of the Department of Education, Skills and Employment and used by the Department of Home Affairs as evidence of enrolment.

The Tribunal reasoned that PRISMS is a reliable record of enrolments unless there is specific evidence to the contrary, and no such evidence was presented in this case. Based on the information available through PRISMS, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was enrolled in a course of study at the time of the decision. Consequently, clause 500.211 was not met, and the Tribunal found that the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 500 (Student) visa were not satisfied. The applicant did not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.