ZHANG (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The applicant sought review of a decision affirming the refusal of their visa application. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the grant of the visa, specifically whether they were a genuine temporary entrant.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied clause 500.212(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, which requires an applicant to genuinely intend to stay in Australia temporarily. In assessing this criterion, the Tribunal was guided by Direction No. 69, which outlines various factors to consider, including the applicant's circumstances in their home country and potential circumstances in Australia, the value of the proposed course of study to the applicant's future, and the applicant's immigration history.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's history of two changes in their area of study, the non-completion of a previous certificate course, and their enrolment in a diploma course after a prior visa refusal. The applicant explained these changes by attributing the initial mistake to their agent and citing financial uncertainty and the impact of COVID-19 on their ability to return to Australia after a holiday as reasons for study delays. However, the Tribunal found that these explanations, when considered alongside the applicant's overall circumstances and immigration history, did not sufficiently demonstrate a genuine intention to temporarily remain in Australia for the purpose of study.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, finding that the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for the visa.