Yu (Migration)

[2021] AATA 977

Yu (Migration) [2021] AATA 977 (1 March 2021)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Miss Jinyue Yu

CASE NUMBER:  1912562

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):         BCC2019/1212827

MEMBER:D Triaca

DATE:1 March 2021

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.

Statement made on 01 March 2021 at 12:25pm

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Subclass 500 (Student) – genuine temporary entrant as student – current enrolment – job opportunity in China – lengthy stay in Australia – limited academic progress – several unrelated courses with limited completion – reasonable changes in career and study pathway – decision under review affirmed    

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 499; Direction No 69
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2 cl 500.212

CASES

Kumar v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2020) FCAFC 16
Vu Vu & Ors v Minister for Immigration and Anor [2020] FCCA 2292

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 3 May 2019 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 11 March 2019. 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.

3. The delegate in this case refused to grant the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements of cl.500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations).

4. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 26 February 2021 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Mandarin and English languages.

5. The applicant was assisted in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.

6. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

7. 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. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need only satisfy the secondary criteria.

   Genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student (cl.500.212)

8. Clause 500.212 requires as follows:

   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

   (b)the applicant intends to comply with any conditions subject to which the visa is granted, having regard to:

   (i)the applicant’s record of compliance with any condition of a visa previously held by the applicant (if any); and

   (ii)the applicant’s stated intention to comply with any conditions to which the visa may be subject; and

   (c)of any other relevant matter.

   Does the applicant intend genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily?

9. In considering whether the applicant satisfies cl.500.212(a), the Tribunal must have regard to Direction No.69, ‘Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa and Student Guardian visa applications’, made under s.499 of the Act. This Direction, which is attached to this decision, requires the Tribunal 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.

10. 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 the genuine temporary entrant criterion.

11. This is made plain from the following statement of Logan J in Kumar v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2020) FCAFC 16 at [4], ‘Of course the Minister’s directions were a relevant consideration. How could it be otherwise in light of s 499 of the Act? But they were guidelines. Reading them as a whole, the Minister did not purport to elevate them beyond that, only to offer guidance to the end of consistency in public administration. Moreover, as Derrington and Thawley JJ explain, the Minister explicitly counselled against a mechanical, “checklist” approach. He recognised that factors might not be all one way; hence his reference to, “on balance”. All this was done in respect of a visa eligibility for which has as a criterion a subject which inherently involves, “a matter of opinion or policy or taste” in terms of satisfaction as to whether an applicant is a genuine student.’

12. Whilst not defined in the Regulations, the word genuine may be taken to mean ‘authentic, real or true’ in according with its ordinary and natural meaning. The Regulations specify two constituent elements of a genuine student visa applicant. First, a genuine applicant is one who intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. The applicant must demonstrate an intention to stay in Australia for a limited time only, not permanently. That intention must be unqualified. This requirement reflects the temporary nature of being a student.[1] Secondly, a ‘genuine applicant’ is a person who intends to comply with any conditions to which the visa may be subject.[2]

    [1] See Singh [2019] (Migration) AATA 2993 at [13]

    [2] See the discussion of the meaning of ‘genuine applicant’ in Vu Vu (Migration) [2019] AATA 5740 (18 December 2019) [22] – [25] upheld on appeal in Vu Vu & Ors v Minister for Immigration and anor [2020] FCCA 2292

13. The issues in this case arose in the following circumstances, the applicant is a 32 year old citizen of China. She first arrived in Australia on 19 October 2009. She has resided here since that time on a series of temporary visas and associated bridging visas. On 11 March 2019 she applied for a further student visa. On 3 May 2019 a delegate of the Department refused her application (delegate’s decision). She subsequently applied to the tribunal for a review of the delegate’s decision and he provided the tribunal with a copy of that decision.

14. The tribunal has concluded that the decision to refuse the applicant a student visa ought to be affirmed in this case, for the reasons which are set out below. In reaching its decision, the tribunal has had regard to:

    (a)The delegate’s decision record;

    (b)The applicant’s original written visa application;

    (c)The oral evidence and arguments of the applicant presented at the hearing;

    (d)Detailed written submission prepared by the applicant’s representative dated 9 December 2020 together with numerous attachments.

    (e)All written material filed by or on behalf of the applicant in relation to this case;

    (f)Other relevant documents on the Tribunal and Department files;

15. The applicant is currently enrolled in a Certificate IV in Information Technology Networking at Abbey College. She commenced this course in July 2020 and is due to complete it in July 2021.She is also enrolled in a Diploma of Telecommunications Engineering at that Institution and is due to complete this course in July 2022. By this application she is seeking to remain in Australia to enable her to complete these courses.

16. The applicant says her future plan is to return to China at the conclusion of her studies and take up an job opportunity at the Beijing Control Technology in accordance with a written job offer, a translation of which is annexed to her submissions (job offer).

17. The applicant has resided in Australia for over a decade without making substantial academic progress Her evidence is that she completed a Diploma in Tertiary Preparation (Nursing) in December 2011. She then enrolled in a Bachelor of Nursing at Australian Catholic University. She did not complete this course. Her enrolment was terminated at the end of Semester 1 in 2015 on account of failing a professional unit on 2 occasions. The applicant appealed the decision and provided evidence of her application for review dated 3 December 2015. She was subsequently offered a position in the Bachelor of Nursing in 2016 based on 6 months study in a Bachelor of Business. However, she failed to satisfy the English requirement of the course and did not complete the Bachelor of Nursing.

18. She enrolled in a Bachelor of Business at Wentworth Institute in 2016. She did not complete this course. At the time of her application for a student visa she enrolled in a series of courses including a Certificate III in Individual Support, Certificate IV in Ageing Support and a Diploma of Community Services. She did not complete these courses. Her submissions states, ‘as a result of her student visa refusal, lack of support and professional guidance, Jinyue only paid for the first semester of these courses, and never attended any of the courses.’ She says that she had an ‘unpleasant experience’ when she attempted the aged support courses and determined that such courses were not for her.

19. The applicant provided evidence that she has completed English courses in Australia including General English at ME English in July 2020. She provided a copy of her certificate for completion of English for Academic purposes in July 2020. The applicant enrolled in the Certificate of Information Technology Networking in July 2020 and is currently studying that course. I accept that she has applied herself to her studies and has made progress in the course. This is evident from a copy of her recent academic transcript.

20. However, notwithstanding the applicant’s recent academic progress, when viewed as a whole, her academic record in Australia is very poor. She has resided here for over a decade without completing any substantial courses since 2011, save for a General English course. It is very difficult to reconcile the length of the applicant’s stay in Australia with the meaning of temporary. I note that a lengthy stay is not necessarily fatal to an application such as the present. There may be circumstances in which an applicant remains here for an extended period whilst following a clear career trajectory or making clear academic progress such as studying a Bachelor and then a Masters. This is not such a case. The applicant has studied a series of seemingly unrelated courses without settling on a clear career path over many years in Australia. This weighs against the application.

21. I acknowledge that Direction 69 contemplates that reasonable changes in career and study pathway ought to be accommodated. I consider that in this case, the applicant’s changes from Nursing, to Business, to Aged Support and Community Services to Information Technology go beyond the reasonable changes contemplated by the Direction.

22. I have considered the applicant’s evidence that the purpose of the study is to enable the applicant to take up a job offer in her home country in the IT industry. I place minimal weight on the job offer and its relevance to the value of the applicant’s course. The document provided by the applicant does not specifically refer to her applicant’s current study either a Certificate IV in Information Technology Networking or Diploma of Telecommunications Engineering. It simply refers to an ‘educational degree’ and the tribunal considers the applicant is not studying a degree. The date of the offer is August 2020 and it is not clear that the offer remains ongoing. Even if it were, the written offer makes clear that a three-month probation period applies. In these circumstances the tribunal does not consider the applicant has demonstrated certain employment follows the successful completion of the course. I consequently I place minimal weight on the job offer in favour of the applicant.

23. I accept the current study has some relevance to the applicant’s plan to work in the IT industry and this weighs slightly in her favour. It has no apparent relevance to her earlier studies in Business, Nursing or Aged Support. it has no apparent relevance to her work in the aged care sector in Australia. The course is not consistent with the applicant’s level of education at a level below her previous Nursing and Business studies. These matters weigh against the applicant. In the circumstances I find the applicant’s Information Technology courses have minimal value to the applicant’s future. She has not demonstrated that successful completion of the courses will improve her employment prospects in her home country or a third country. I do not consider these Information Technology courses are likely to improve her remuneration prospects in her home country.

24. I do not accept that the reason for the applicant’s poor performance in Australia is predominantly due to her following paths chosen for her by her parents as she suggested in her evidence. She says that she did not enjoy the courses favoured by her parents. Whilst I consider that an international student may be influenced to choose courses in Australia to please their family in certain circumstances, it is difficult to accept that the applicant is in a situation in which she has taken a decade to escape such familial interference or influence in her study choices.

25. I have considered the applicant’s submissions and case law submitted by the applicant’s representative. I do not consider this is a situation in which the applicant has initially chosen courses that were beyond her capabilities and is forced to reconsider her choices (as appears to have been the case in 1418469 [2015] MRTA 666 as submitted by the applicant). In this case, the applicant has failed to complete higher level Bachelor of Nursing and Business and also failed to complete lower level courses in Aged Support and Community Service. This is not simply a case in which the applicant is succeeding academically on account of lowering her expectations.

26. I accept the applicant’s submission that she did not ‘abandon’ her course in Nursing. I accept that her enrolment was cancelled on account of her failed subject on two occasions. I do not accept there is evidence to conclude the University failed to offer her support or acted in a manner other than in accordance with its standard processes including offering the applicant the opportunity to review the decision, which she appears to have taken up, albeit unsuccessfully.

27. There is no evidence in relation to the applicant’s circumstances in her home country relative to others there.

28. The applicant states, and the Tribunal accepts that she has no concerns in relation to political or civil unrest in her home country.

29. The applicant states, and the Tribunal accepts, that she has no concerns in relation to military service commitments in her home country.

30. The applicant’s family in her home country are her parents. She has travelled to China on a number of occasions to see them. She provided medical evidence in relation to her mother’s poor health. I accept her evidence in this regard. She says that she speaks to her family three to five times per week via video calls. I accept this evidence. On the whole, consider the applicant’s family ties to China, I do not consider these ties operate as a significant incentive for her to return home. Whilst I accept she loves her family and is close to them, the reality is that she has lived in Australia for over a decade and has not yielded to such incentives. She seems to have satisfactorily managed such ties by video call and visiting. She is now seeking to further extend her time here. In these circumstances I do not consider her family or personal ties to China are operating as a significant incentive for her to return home.

31. There is no specific evidence to suggest the applicant has personal ties to Australia that operate as a strong incentive for her to remain here.

32. The applicant works in Australia as a disability support worker on a casual basis. She works through an agency. She earns approximately $30 AUD per hour on a part time basis. She has financial support from her family. I do not consider there is evidence to suggest her economic circumstances operate as a significant incentive for her to remain in Australia.

33. The applicant has travelled between Australia and China on a number of occasions without any issues. She appears to have complied with the conditions of her various visas since arriving here. I do not make any adverse findings in relation to her travel or immigration history.

34. I have considered that refusing this application will have some prejudice to the applicant. She has commenced studying the IT course and has spent time and money pursuing it. She will be disappointed if she is unable to complete this course. However, I place only minor weight on this matter. She enrolled in the course in the knowledge that her application had been refused by the delegate and there was no certainty surrounding the outcome of this review application. Further, she has completed part of the study and will have acquired some skills and knowledge in IT that may be of assistance to her in the future so I do not consider the time wasted. In any event, the applicant has had a substantial period in Australia in which to study an IT course if she wished to. 

35. There do not appear to be any further matters relevant to the application.

36. The tribunal has considered all the evidence. It does not consider the applicant to be a genuine applicant. Unfortunately, the applicant’s more recent efforts are too little too late when her time in Australia is considered in its entirety. The applicant has had every opportunity to study an IT course during her time here and instead chose other courses over many years. Further, the tribunal considers it is difficult to reconcile a stay in Australia of over a decade with the meaning of temporary. In all the circumstances, the application is refused.

37. On the basis of the above, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. Accordingly, the applicant does not meet cl.500.212(a).

38. Accordingly, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl.500.212.

39. Given the above findings, the Tribunal finds 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

40. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.

    D Triaca
    Member

    
    

    Attachment – Direction No.69

    DIRECTION NUMBER 69 – ASSESSING THE GENUINE TEMPORARY ENTRANT CRITERION FOR STUDENT VISA AND STUDENT GUARDIAN VISA APPLICATIONS

    (Section 499)

    I, PETER DUTTON, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection give this Direction under section 499 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

    Dated: 18 April 2016

    Peter Dutton

    
    

    Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

    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 of Direction No. 69 - Preliminary

    Name of Direction

    This Direction is Direction No. 69 - Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa and Student Guardian visa applications.

    It may be cited as Direction No. 69.

    Commencement

    This Direction commences on 1 July 2016.

    Interpretation

    Act means the Migration Act 1958.

    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’s temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications in Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    This Direction also applies to members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal who review the decisions of primary decision-makers in relation to a Student visa or a Student Guardian visa application.

    The genuine temporary entrant criterion must be satisfied by all applicants who make an application for either a Student visa seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for a Student Guardian visa.

    Preamble

    The Australian Government operates a student visa programme 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 programme 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 of Direction No. 69 - 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.

    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 Subclass 500 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;

    dwhether 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.

    b.Previous travels to Australia or other countries, including:

    i.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;

    ii.whether the applicant previously held a visa that was cancelled or considered for cancellation, and the associated circumstances;

    iii.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

    iv.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 Subclass 500 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.