Zhang (Migration) [2020] AATA 5688 (25 September 2020)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
APPLICANT: Mr Hang Zhang
CASE NUMBER: 1928281
HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S): BCC2019/4039003
MEMBER:D Triaca
DATE:25 September 2020
PLACE OF DECISION: Melbourne
DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.
Statement made on 25 September 2020 at 11:11am
CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION –Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – subclass 500 (Student) visa– genuine temporary entrant criterion not met– failed to explain in any meaningful detail how his current set of courses will assist him to achieve his future plans – decision under review affirmedLEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 359, 499
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2, cl 500.212STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 17 September 2019 to refuse to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
The applicant applied for the visa on 14 August 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.
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).
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 24 September 2020 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Mandarin and English languages.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that decision under review should be affirmed.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
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)
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…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Zhang (Migration) and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2020] AATA 5688
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Tribunal was required to determine if Zhang was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, as defined by clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. This involved assessing two key elements: whether Zhang genuinely intended to stay in Australia temporarily, and whether Zhang intended to comply with the conditions of the visa.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal referred to Direction No. 69, which provides guidance on assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion. This Direction requires consideration of the applicant's circumstances in their home country and Australia, the value of the course to their future, their immigration history, and any other relevant information. The Tribunal noted that the term "genuine" means authentic, real, or true. It emphasised that the applicant must demonstrate an unqualified intention to stay in Australia for a limited time only, reflecting the temporary nature of a student visa. Furthermore, the applicant must intend to comply with all visa conditions.
The Tribunal concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed, indicating that Zhang did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.