The applicant stated he was 27 years of age at the time of the hearing.
He was from mainland China and came to Australia in 2018.
He was studying a Bachelor of Computational Design at the University of New South Wales (UNSW).
The Tribunal discussed with the applicant the cancellation decision of the delegate dated 2 January 2024 with respect to non-compliance with condition 8202 of the student visa, namely that he was not enrolled in a registered course of study since 22 February 2023. The applicant replied that he agreed that he was not enrolled at the relevant period and that grounds for cancellation existed.
The Tribunal proceeded to ask the applicant to give evidence as to why the visa ought not to be cancelled.
The applicant explained that during Covid-19 his course was deferred, and he assumed his COE would be further postponed as he had family problems.
The applicant's representative clarified that during Covid-19, the applicant's COE was deferred.
The evidence was that the 2020 COE was automatically deferred by UNSW.
The Tribunal proceeded to ask the applicant why he was not enrolled since 22 February 2023. That this was the issue before the Tribunal. That the Covid-19 deferral was not the issue.
The applicant explained that during the 22 February 2023 period of non-enrolment, he had a lot of issues concerning his family, relationship and finances.
The applicant stated he decided to stop studying temporarily in February 2023.
An issue of concern raised by the Tribunal was whether the applicant temporarily stopped his studies which indicated a deferral or whether the applicant ceased his studies.
The applicant's evidence was that he had sent an email to UNSW from his student email account asking for a temporary deferral. That he did not want a cessation. He wanted to defer his studies. However, he did not have a copy of this email as he was now locked out of his student email and could not access his student emails.
The Tribunal expressed its concerns that the applicant did not have a copy of such an important email including that the applicant had not kept a copy of the email or copied his private email account. The applicant replied that he did not know about emails and learnt email in China.
The Tribunal raised a concern that UNSW seemed to be emailing the applicant on his private email in the material submitted to the Tribunal and that as he had obtained another COE his student email account would have been activated. The applicant replied that only his student account was activated but his history of emails was not released to him.
The Tribunal raised its concern that UNSW would not make a mistake between a deferral and a cessation. The applicant replied that the cessation may have occurred due to outstanding tuition fees due to financial problems.
The Tribunal raised its concern that the applicant has had over a year to prepare for his matter at the Tribunal. The applicant replied he had been spending the past year studying. That he never applied to cease his studies.
The Tribunal raised its concerns that for the applicant to be studying a degree in computational design and to not know about managing his emails did not seem believable.
The applicant gave evidence his parents got divorced in mid-2022.
The Tribunal asked why the divorce impacted his studies. The applicant explained that due to his parents divorcing, there was disagreement about paying his tuition fees.
The Tribunal asked the applicant whether he approached UNSW to seek financial hardship relief due to his family problems. The applicant replied that he did not.
The applicant further suggested that deferrals were not available for international students. The Tribunal gave the applicant time to provide evidence of this from UNSW website.
The applicant said his main reason for not being enrolled was his parents' divorce and he could not pay his tuition fees. He shut himself in his room and did not study.
The Tribunal asked the applicant what he had been doing from February 2023 onwards after the cancellation. The applicant replied he had been studying and finishing up his degree.
The Tribunal raised an issue about whether the applicant could study whilst his student visa was cancelled. The applicant stated his bridging visa has study rights. The Tribunal stated that the PRISMS check does not show an active COE, and this contradicted the applicant studying at present. The applicant replied he had no idea why his current COE was cancelled.
The Tribunal granted the applicant further time to provide information concerning his locked-out emails, information from the UNSW website about international student fee deferrals, and on his current COE cancellation.
The hearing concluded.
[2]
The applicant also filed a bundle of submissions in support of his review. These included the following materials.
Character reference by Liang Aus Pty Ltd.
UNSW Graduation Statement for Bachelor of Computational Design for the applicant.
Submissions of 23 November 2023 addressed to the visa delegate.
Psychologist Report of 24 November 2023.
Parents' Divorce papers.
Parents' bank statements.
Copies of assessment tasks from UNSW degree program.
Statement from applicant's mother of 23 November 2023.
On 1 September 2025 the representative filed submissions to clarify and emphasise the evidence at the hearing that the applicant stated he wanted to temporarily stop his studies and that it was UNSW who wrote a note suggesting cessation of studies. That the applicant did not use the word 'cease' in his evidence.
The Tribunal has reviewed these materials including the Department and Tribunal file documents and taken them all into consideration.
[3]
The unresolved evidence in this matter concerned what communication by email the applicant made to UNSW about the events leading up to him not being enrolled as at 22 February 2023.
The applicant's evidence was that he had sent emails to UNSW in which he sought to temporarily stop studying.
However, the notation from UNSW on the cancelled COE as shown in the PRISMS record stated that "student notifies cessation of studies".
The applicant also gave evidence that he did not have access to his student email account to produce the emails to UNSW about his deferral or temporarily stop studying.
As a matter of procedural fairness, the Tribunal caused to be issued a subpoena to UNSW asking for copies of emails and documents and information held about the applicant and in particular with respect to his not being enrolled as at 22 February 2023 and the relevant cancelled COE including copies of emails.
The UNSW answered the subpoena and provided the Tribunal with copies of the applicant's email correspondence and materials on file with respect to his not being enrolled as at 22 February 2023 and the relevant cancelled COE.
Notably the material sent from USW included the PRSIMS Student Course Variation document, a more detailed explanation which stated with respect to COE D6EOA364 cancelled on 22 February 2023 that the applicant had failed to recommence studies in Term 1, 2023 and had not contacted UNSW to discuss their intentions. This was stated in UNSW document "SCV Shen Minhui.PDF" in the subpoena bundle.
However, in the bundle of documents returned from UNSW there was no email from the applicant to UNSW which suggested or showed that the applicant emailed UNSW requesting a deferral or that he wanted to stop studying temporarily with respect to COE D6EOA364 cancelled on 22 February 2023.
What the UNSW response to the subpoena does show is that the applicant made efforts to contact UNSW and seek to re-enrol after he was sent his notice of intention to consider cancellation. The Department's NOICC is dated 17 November 2023. The UNSW subpoena documents show that on 21 November 2023 the applicant contacted UNSW via email seeking to re-enrol and raising his parents' divorce and his health concerns. In his email of 21 November 2023, he admits he had not done anything for the prior 11 months and sought to re-enrol and complete his studies upon which he would return home.
The whole bundle of material from UNSW in answer to the subpoena was sent to the applicant to comment on along with the Tribunal's concern that no such email from the applicant as claimed by him during the hearing relating to him requesting to temporarily stop studying seems to exist.
There has been no reply or comment from the applicant.
The Tribunal prefers the documentary evidence returned by UNSW on the subpoena.
The Tribunal finds that the applicant did not email UNSW asking to temporarily stop studying or seeking a deferral with respect to COE D6EOA364 cancelled on 22 February 2023.
The Tribunal finds that the applicant had failed to recommence studies in Term 1, 2023 and had not contacted UNSW to discuss their intentions.
[4]
Condition 8202, as it applies in this case, is set out in the attachment to this decision. Relevantly, it requires that the applicant:
be enrolled in a full time registered course: 8202(2)(a)
maintain enrolment in a registered course that will provide a qualification from the Australian Qualification Framework that is at the same level as, or at a higher level than, the course in relation to which the visa was granted: 8202(2)(b)
has not been certified by his or her education provider, as not achieving satisfactory course progress as specified: 8202(2)(c)(i), and
has not been certified by his or her education provider, as not achieving satisfactory course attendance as specified: 8202(2)(c)(ii).
In the present case, the applicant's student visa was cancelled on the basis the applicant was not enrolled in a full-time registered course as at 22 February 2023.
The applicant very appropriately made concessions that he was not enrolled at the relevant time as set out in the Delegate's decision.
The Department PRISMS record which was also put to the applicant indicated he was not enrolled at the relevant time as set out in the Delegate's decision.
The subpoena returned from UNSW also shows that the applicant had failed to recommence studies in Term 1, 2023 and had not contacted UNSW to discuss their intentions.
Contrary to the evidence and submissions of the applicant, there was no evidence that the applicant has sought to temporarily stop studying or sought a deferral with respect to COE D6EOA364 cancelled on 22 February 2023.
On the evidence before the Tribunal, the applicant was not enrolled in a full-time registered course as at 22 February 2023. Accordingly, the applicant has not complied with condition 8202(2)(a).
[5]
Having found that the applicant has not complied with a condition of the visa, the Tribunal must consider whether the power to cancel the visa should be exercised. For temporary visas other than criminal justice and enforcement visas, there are prescribed matters to which the decision-maker must have regard in determining whether they are satisfied as mentioned in s 116(1)(b): s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A of the Regulations. The prescribed matters are set out in the attachment to this decision.
There were no issues or considerations which engaged reg 2.43A of the Regulations.
Beyond the matters prescribed under reg 2.43A, the Tribunal has had regard to the circumstances of this case, including matters raised by the applicant, and matters in the Department's policy guidelines 'General visa cancellation powers' (s 109, s 116, s 128, s 134B and s 140)', which refers to matters such as the consequences of cancelling the visa, international obligations and any other relevant matters.
The Department's procedural instructions set out the following relevant matters in considering whether a student visa should not be cancelled:
[6]
• The degree of hardship that may be caused to the visa holder and any family
[7]
• The circumstances in which the ground for cancellation arose.
[8]
• The visa holder's past and present behaviour towards the department (for
[9]
example, whether they have been truthful and cooperative in their dealings
[10]
• Whether there are persons in Australia whose visas would, or may, be
[11]
• Whether there are mandatory legal consequences to a cancellation decision.
[12]
• Whether Australia has obligations under relevant international agreements
[13]
that would be breached as a result of the visa cancellation.
[14]
With respect modern slavery, there was no evidence that the applicant was involved in workplace matters that engaged the modern slavery provisions. No weight is given.
With respect to compliance of his visa conditions, other than the non-enrolment, there was no other evidence or information adverse to the applicant. Some positive weight is given.
With respect to hardship to the applicant or his family members, the Tribunal notes that the applicant has now completed his degree. No weight is given.
With respect to the circumstances of the visa cancellation, the subpoena material from UNSW states that the applicant had failed to recommence studies in Term 1, 2023 and had not contacted UNSW to discuss their intentions. Some negative weight is given.
With respect to his past and present behaviour to the Department, the evidence and information did not suggest any other breach or disregard of his overall visa compliance. Some positive weight is given to this.
With respect to persons in Australia who might be affected, the evidence was that there were no children or other family of the applicant in Australia who would be negatively impacted. No weight is given.
With respect to the effects of such a cancellation, the Tribunal accepts that a cancellation would result in the applicant having to return home and he would be subject to a re-entry limitation. However, the facts did not suggest that he was undesirable or would not be able to apply and seek a waiver. He did not have any other serious breaches of his visa or of the criminal law in Australia. The effects of cancellation here are the ordinary statutory effects prescribed by law in the Act. No weight is given.
With respect to non-refoulement obligations, the applicant did not make any claims that might suggest he is a refugee or entitled to complementary protection or that his return would be in breach of Australia's international treaty obligations. No weight is given.
With respect to other considerations, some positive weight is given to his parents' divorce, relationship, dental and spine, and Covid-19 problems which impacted his studies.
[15]
Whilst the applicant gave evidence his parents divorced in mid-2022, this does not adequately explain why the applicant failed to recommence studies in Term 1 2023.
The Tribunal accepts that a parental divorce is difficult. However, the applicant is not a child or a teenager. He would have been 24 years of age when his parents divorced in 2022. The Tribunal has also read and considered the psychologist report of Mr Dadgostar of 24 November 2023. Tribunal has also considered that the applicant had some dental and lumbar/spine problems and relationship issues along with the impacts of Covid-19. Whilst the divorce and these other issues would have been disappointing, stressful, and hurtful, it would not be a reason to not return to his studies for Term 1, 2023.
Notably, the applicant also says he faced financial difficulties which led to him not being able to enrol for Term 1, 2023. However, the student visa program is premised on applicants having enough funds to study in Australia. Furthermore, there is no evidence of the applicant communicating his financial difficulties to UNSW prior to enrolling for Term 1, 2023.
Neither does the applicant provide any explanation for why he has not called his parents to give evidence during the hearing. His evidence was that due to the divorce there was a disagreement about payment of his fees. However, the best evidence on this could have come from his parents but they were not called to give evidence. There is a statement on file from his mother of 23 November 2023, however that statement does not mention any issues regarding the parents not being able to pay his past tuition fees due to the divorce. His mother does promise to provide financial support for his future studies. However, there is no discussion in his mother's statement of any disagreement or past failure to pay his fees due to the divorce. Neither does the applicant file any updated evidence of his parents for the Tribunal to consider.
Notably, the applicant's submissions to the delegate of 23 November 2023 does not mention that his parents were not able to pay his fees due to their divorce. Rather, his submissions suggest that fees were payable on time, and he also provides a table showing financial support by his mother. He stated therein:
[16]
I come from a financially secure family, and throughout my studies, my parents have generously covered all my expenses, including tuition fees, living costs, and travel expenditures. My mother transfer money to my Australia bank account on regular basis, so I don't need to work to support my living. I listed transaction histories to substantiate these statements and attached relevant evidence.
[17]
The Tribunal does not accept that the applicant had difficulty paying his tuition fees or difficulty paying his tuition fees due to his parents' divorce. His own submissions above contradict this claim or the claim that he could not seek financial relief from UNSW.
A large part of the applicant's evidence was that he had emailed the UNSW seeking to temporarily stop studying or a deferral. However, this contradicted the material on the Tribunal file. A subpoena was issued to UNSW which upon return did not show any such email from the applicant and the materials returned stated that the applicant had failed to recommence studies in Term 1, 2023 and had not contacted UNSW to discuss their intentions. Despite being given the subpoena material and an opportunity to comment or respond, the applicant does not do so.
The Tribunal does not accept that the applicant sent any email to UNSW seeking to temporarily stop studying or a deferral for Term 1, 2023 or with respect to COE D6EOA364 cancelled on 22 February 2023. The subpoena returned from UNSW contradicts this claim.
The Tribunal notes that the applicant has now completed his degree at UNSW. The core purpose for which a student visa would be held has been exhausted. The applicant has successfully completed his studies. His position was that he had study rights on his bridging visa, and he had spent the last year completing his studies.
Notably, the applicant's own email to UNSW of 21 November 2023 states he had not done anything for the prior 11 months and sought to re-enrol and complete his degree upon which he would return home. He has now completed his degree.
The applicant did not give any evidence or make any submissions that he sought to further study or sought to maintain his student visa for other purposes such as further lawful stay in Australia.
The applicant's own email of 21 November 2023 to UNSW clearly states he sought to return home after completing his degree.
The applicant's submissions to the delegate of 23 November 2023 gives a detailed account of his intention of returning to China after completing his degree. These include:
[18]
Upon completing my degree, my plan is to contribute to China's building and construction industry. This involves seeking opportunities with architectural firms, urban planning organizations, or technology companies that focus on computational design. In China, there is a growing trend among architectural and urban design firms to incorporate computational design into their projects. Additionally, municipalities and urban planning authorities, including prominent cities like Shanghai, are increasingly recognizing the value of computational design in city planning.
[19]
The applicant has now given evidence to the Tribunal that he has now completed his degree at UNSW.
There was nothing in his evidence or submissions to satisfy the Tribunal that the student visa cancellation ought to be set aside.
None of the relevant considerations above or their cumulation satisfied the Tribunal that the student visa should not be cancelled.
[20]
Considering the circumstances as a whole, the Tribunal concludes that the student visa should be cancelled.
[21]
The Tribunal affirms the decision to cancel the applicant's Class TU visa.
[22]
Representative for the Applicant: Mr Zhoujie Huangfu (MARN: 1700109)
(1) The holder must be enrolled in a full time course of study or training if the holder is:
[25]
(a) a Defence student; or
(b) a Foreign Affairs student; or
(c) a secondary exchange student.
[26]
(a) must be enrolled in a full time registered course; and
(b) subject to subclause (3), must maintain enrolment in a registered course that, once completed, will provide a qualification from the Australian Qualifications Framework that is at the same level as, or at a higher level than, the registered course in relation to which the visa was granted; and
(c) must ensure that neither of the following subparagraphs applies in respect of a registered course undertaken by the holder:
(i) the education provider has certified the holder, for a registered course undertaken by the holder, as not achieving satisfactory course progress for section 19 of the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 and the relevant standard of the national code made by the Education Minister under section 33 of that Act;
(ii) the education provider has certified the holder, for a registered course undertaken by the holder, as not achieving satisfactory course attendance for section 19 of the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 and the relevant standard of the national code made by the Education Minister under section 33 of that Act.
[27]
(3) A holder is taken to satisfy the requirement set out in paragraph (2)(b) if the holder:
[28]
(a) is enrolled in a course at the Australian Qualifications Framework level 10; and
(b) changes their enrolment to a course at the Australian Qualifications Framework level 9.
2.43A Minister must have regard to certain matters in considering cancellation of certain temporary visas for breach of visa condition
[31]
(1) This regulation applies in relation to a visa if:
[32]
(a) the visa is a temporary visa other than:
(i) a criminal justice visa; or
(ii) an enforcement visa; and
(b) the Minister is satisfied that the visa holder has not complied with a particular condition (the relevant condition) to which the holder's visa is subject; and
(2) For the purposes of paragraph 116(1A)(a) of the Act, the Minister must have regard to the following matters in determining whether the Minister is satisfied as mentioned in paragraph 116(1)(b) of the Act:
[34]
(a) any written certificate issued by a certifying entity that is a government entity if the certificate:
(i) was issued in relation to the visa holder in respect of a workplace exploitation matter; and
(ii) sets out the matters agreed to by Immigration and the government entity;
(b) any written certificate issued by a certifying entity that is not a government entity and that states that the entity considers that:
(i) there is prima facie evidence that the visa holder has been affected by a workplace exploitation matter; and
(ii) if any law limits the time within which a proceeding may be instituted, or a complaint made, in relation to the workplace exploitation matter - that time has not expired; and
(iii) there is a connection between the circumstances relating to the breach of the relevant condition and the workplace exploitation matter by which the visa holder has been affected;
(c) whether there is a connection between the circumstances relating to the breach of the relevant condition and the workplace exploitation matter to which a certificate mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b) relates;
(d) whether there is any evidence that the visa holder was not complying, or is no longer seeking to comply, with the purpose of the visa;
(e) whether the visa holder has committed, in writing, to do both of the following:
(i) to take action, in a timely manner, to resolve the workplace exploitation matter to which a certificate mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b) relates;
(ii) to comply in future with the visa conditions to which the holder's visa is subject;
(f) whether the visa holder has failed to comply with a commitment of a kind mentioned in paragraph (e) of this subregulation, or paragraph 2.43B(2)(d), (3)(d) or (4)(d), that the visa holder has previously given in relation to the visa.
[35]
(3) Subregulation (2) does not limit, or otherwise affect, a power or duty of the Minister to cancel the visa under:
[36]
(a) paragraph 116(1)(b) of the Act for non compliance with a condition (other than the relevant condition) to which the visa holder's visa is subject; or
(b) a provision other than paragraph 116(1)(b) of the Act.
[37]
Note: For example, see subregulation 2.43(2) for the circumstances in which the Minister must cancel a visa.
Legislation Cited (1)
Services for Overseas Students Act 2000
Cases Cited (1)
Shen (Migration) [2025] ARTA 2605 (15 October 2025)