1. 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 was applicable when the Applicant applied for a student visa, 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.
2. 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.

1. I will set out my discussion of the evidence and my findings in this matter through a chronology of key events.
2. 24 June 2017 - the Applicant first arrived in Australia on a student visa.[2] The records of the Applicant's movements into and out of Australia record that between that date and the current date, the Applicant left Australia and returned here a total of 16 times. She arrived on a student visa which expired on 2 January 2018.
3. 2 January 2020 - the Applicant was granted a further student visa which expired on 15 March 2020. She was then granted a series of bridging and student visas which took her up to 29 November 2023.
4. 7 September 2020 - the Applicant enrolled in her first course of study in Australia, in General English, which she finished on 4 December 2020.[3]
5. 7 September 2021 - the Applicant enrolled in a Diploma of Leadership and Management course, which she finished on 2 September 2022.
6. 31 October 2022 - the Applicant enrolled in a course in General English, which she finished on 25 November 2022.
7. 24 January 2023 - the Applicant enrolled in a Certificate IV in Kitchen Management which she completed on 27 September 2024.
8. 27 October 2023 - the Applicant made her application for a student visa which is the subject of the current application to the Tribunal.
9. 15 October 2024 - the Applicant enrolled in a Diploma of Hospitality Management which she completed on 28 March 2025.
10. 13 May 2024 - the date of the Delegate's decision refusing to grant the Applicant a student visa.
11. 27 May 2025 - the Applicant applied to the Tribunal for review of that decision.
12. Accordingly, this chronology shows that after the Delegate's decision to refuse to grant the Applicant a student visa, she had completed the most recent course she had enrolled in, in Australia, on 28 March 2025.

1. The Delegate decided that the Applicant was not a genuine temporary entrant into Australia for the purposes of study. The Delegate considered the history of her study in Australia, and her education in Taiwan, where she had achieved a Bachelor of Business Administration, majoring in finance. In Australia, her most recent studies had been in kitchen management and hospitality management.
2. The Delegate found that the Applicant had been in Australia for the majority of time over the past eight years. As at the date of the Delegate's decision, the Applicant was proposing to extend her stay in Australia to undertake further education that the Delegate was of the view that the Applicant had been unable to establish would add significant value to her future. The Delegate had concerns that the Applicant was attempting to use the student visa program as a means of maintaining ongoing residence in Australia. The Delegate therefore refused to grant the Applicant a student visa. The Applicant applied to the Tribunal for review of that decision on 27 May 2025.

1. In this section of these reasons, I will focus on the matter in issue in this case, which is that the Applicant had completed her most recent course of study on 28 March 2025.
2. At the hearing, the Applicant candidly admitted that she had finished her most recent course of study in Australia in March 2025. She was not enrolled to study anything in Australia now. She did not intend to study a further course in Australia. The reason that she said she wanted the student visa is because her application for the visa was refused in 2024, and she wanted to leave Australia with no stain on her name.
3. She said that when she received the outcome of this Tribunal's review, she will prepare to go back to Taiwan.
4. Initially, her student visa was in fact a student guardian visa, for her sons to study in Australia. Her husband was on the same kind of visa. Her eldest son was now aged 20, had finished school and was studying in Australia. Her youngest son was just about to finish year 12 at school in Australia. (He will have finished school here, by the date of this decision). She explained that the multiple trips she had undertaken to Taiwan as recorded in her list of movements, was to visit her elderly family. She said that they required help and she provided that help.
5. What is critical for assessment of whether an applicant is eligible for a student visa is whether the applicant is currently enrolled in a course of study in Australia. That is an assessment which must be undertaken at the relevant date of decision. That is the date of the delegate's decision when the delegate is the relevant decision-maker, or the Tribunal when the matter is before the Tribunal for review of the delegate's decision.
6. As at the date of my decision, the Applicant is not enrolled for a course of study in Australia. She therefore does not satisfy the requirements of cl 500.211(a) of the Regulations, and is not eligible for the grant of a student visa. She clearly was, at the date of the Delegate's decision, enrolled in a course of study, but the relevant facts have changed since then.
7. It is not necessary for me to decide whether the Applicant is a genuine temporary entrant into Australia for the purposes of study, which was the basis of the Delegate's decision. It is simply a matter of fact that as at the date of this decision that the Applicant is not currently enrolled in a course of study in Australia. Because of that, she is not entitled to a student visa. That does not amount to a 'stain' on her visa history, which she said was the reason why she was still seeking a student visa. She has been on a bridging visa whilst this application to the Tribunal is before it, and is therefore not an unlawful non-citizen in Australia, at least until after my decision is being processed.

1. Since I am not satisfied that the Applicant meets the criteria of being enrolled in a course of study in Australia, it is not necessary for me to consider cl 500.212 as the Delegate had to. Even if the Applicant was able to satisfy those paragraphs, because I have found that she does not meet the criteria in cl 500.211(a) means that she does not meet the criteria for a student visa as at the date of my decision.
2. I will affirm the Delegate's decision not to grant the Applicant a student visa, but for different reasons to the Delegate who decided that the Applicant was not a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl 500.212. Instead, the reason for my decision is that the Applicant does not satisfy cl 500.211(a), in that she is not currently enrolled in a course of study in Australia.

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

Representative for the Applicant: Mr Wayne Hunt (MARN: 0637790)

[1] As was the then Minister's then title.

[2] The Tribunal obtained the records of the Applicant's movements between Australia and Taiwan from the Commonwealth Department which administers the Act (the Department). The text of the chronology on the Applicant's movements comes from that document.

[3] Details of the Applicant's studies in Australia come from her details in the PRISMS database. PRISMS is an acronym for the Provider Registration and International Student Management System operated by the Commonwealth Government.