When a student visa decision is refused or cancelled, the applicant can ask the tribunal to review it. Our pipeline holds 778 such decisions (2024 to 2026), covering the visa for people studying a registered course in Australia. Here is what actually happened in them, straight from the published record.
These figures describe decisions that have already been made. Every case turns on its own facts and evidence, so they are a picture of the past, not a prediction. This is general information, not migration advice.
How to read these decisions
The Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) reviews decisions made by the Department of Home Affairs. Until 14 October 2024 it was called the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). When someone is refused a visa or has one cancelled, they can often ask the tribunal to look at the decision again.
- Upheld / Affirmed
- The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stands (the applicant lost).
- Set aside
- The tribunal disagreed with the original decision and replaced it (the applicant won).
- Remitted
- The case was sent back to Home Affairs to decide again, with directions (a fresh chance for the applicant).
- Overturned
- The original decision was reversed. On these pages we group overturned decisions under "Set aside" above.
Citations follow a simple pattern: [2026] ARTA 315 means decision number 315 of the tribunal in 2026. Older decisions use AAT in place of ARTA.
What the tribunal decided
Across these 778 decisions, the tribunal confirmed the original decision 49% of the time, set it aside 9% of the time, and remitted it for reconsideration 42% of the time.
| Outcome | Decisions | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Remitted | 324 | 41.6% |
| Upheld | 296 | 38.0% |
| Affirmed | 86 | 11.1% |
| Set aside | 72 | 9.3% |
Counts from 778 decisions captured by our pipeline, as at 2026-09-27. Outcome is the result recorded in each decision.
Decisions by year
How many decisions our pipeline holds for each year, and how often the original decision was set aside that year.
| Year | Decisions | Set aside |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 222 | 9% |
| 2025 | 290 | 9% |
| 2024 | 266 | 11% |
Most-cited legislation and rules
The provisions of the Migration Act and Regulations cited most often across the 175 decisions on this topic that record their citations. The number is how many of those decisions cite it.
Recent decisions
The 40 most recent decisions on this topic. Select a decision to read the full stored case story: the situation, the question before the tribunal, and what the tribunal established, straight from the record.
[2026] ARTA 21172026-09-04AffirmedThe applicant claimed they did not receive hearing notices because they went to their junk email folder, but the Tribunal found they had been sufficiently notified…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant failed to attend a scheduled hearing for a Subclass 500 Student visa review, and their subsequent request for reinstatement was denied.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant claimed they did not receive hearing notices because they went to their junk email folder, but the Tribunal found they had been sufficiently notified through other means.
What the tribunal established
A tribunal must consider whether an applicant has a reasonable excuse for absence and whether the application has merit when deciding whether to reinstate a dismissed application.
[2026] ARTA 21192026-09-03AffirmedWhether the applicant provided incorrect information and bogus documents in breach of sections 101(b) and 103 of the Migration Act, and whether the Tribunal should…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, an Indian national, had his Subclass 500 student visa cancelled by a delegate after verification checks revealed that the educational documents submitted with his application were forged.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant provided incorrect information and bogus documents in breach of sections 101(b) and 103 of the Migration Act, and whether the Tribunal should exercise discretion to set aside the cancellation despite the non-compliance.
What the tribunal established
Under ss 98 and 100 of the Migration Act, a visa applicant is strictly responsible for the accuracy of information provided in their application, regardless of whether they engaged an agent or were unaware that the information was incorrect.
[2026] ARTA 21372026-09-03RemittedThe applicant was refused the visa because she did not meet the English language proficiency requirements at the time of her application.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Miss Laura Katerin Cortes Sierra, applied for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa to undertake study in Australia.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant was refused the visa because she did not meet the English language proficiency requirements at the time of her application.
What the tribunal established
An applicant for a Subclass 500 visa must provide evidence of English language proficiency as specified in an instrument, which can include achieving certain test scores or completing a minimum period of ELICOS.
[2026] ARTA 21262026-09-02AffirmedThe delegate refused to grant the visa on the grounds that the applicant was not a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, specifically that he did not intend…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, Mr Rohit Sharma, applied for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa to undertake study in Australia.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused to grant the visa on the grounds that the applicant was not a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, specifically that he did not intend genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily.
What the tribunal established
A genuine temporary entrant must intend to stay in Australia temporarily, considering their circumstances, immigration history, and any other relevant matters.
[2026] ARTA 21322026-08-31AffirmedThe applicant did not meet the English language proficiency requirement due to an insufficient score on an English test and questions about her ELICOS enrolment.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant applied for a Student visa (Subclass 500) to undertake study in Australia.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant did not meet the English language proficiency requirement due to an insufficient score on an English test and questions about her ELICOS enrolment.
What the tribunal established
The interpretation of 'is enrolled' in the context of visa requirements requires careful consideration of the legislative text, its purpose, and surrounding provisions.
[2026] ARTA 21242026-08-28RemittedThe delegate refused the visa because they were not satisfied that the applicant and the primary person had been in a de facto relationship for 12 months, as required by…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant sought review of a decision to refuse a Subclass 500 (Student) visa, claiming to be a member of the family unit of the primary visa holder.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused the visa because they were not satisfied that the applicant and the primary person had been in a de facto relationship for 12 months, as required by cl. 500.311.
What the tribunal established
A registered de facto relationship exempts the applicant from the 12-month relationship duration requirement for a Subclass 500 visa.
[2026] ARTA 21392026-08-28AffirmedWhether the applicant breached condition 8202 by failing to maintain enrolment in a course at the same or higher AQF level as his original grant, and whether the…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a Subclass 500 visa holder, ceased enrolment in his Bachelor course and enrolled in lower-level VET courses due to health issues, family bereavement, and reliance on an education consultancy.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant breached condition 8202 by failing to maintain enrolment in a course at the same or higher AQF level as his original grant, and whether the Tribunal should exercise discretion to cancel the visa.
What the tribunal established
Under s 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act, a visa may be cancelled if the holder fails to comply with a condition; the Tribunal must consider prescribed matters under reg 2.43A and policy guidance when exercising discretion.
[2026] ARTA 21162026-08-27RemittedThe delegate refused the visa on the basis that the applicant was not a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, specifically not meeting the genuine temporary…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Mr Nicolas Fajardo Gonzalez, applied for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa to undertake study in Australia.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused the visa on the basis that the applicant was not a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, specifically not meeting the genuine temporary entrant (GTE) criterion.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal must assess whether the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, considering their circumstances in their home country, potential circumstances in Australia, and the value of the course to their future.
[2026] ARTA 21402026-08-27RemittedThe applicant was found not to have met the health criteria, specifically PIC 4005(1)(aa) for undertaking a required medical assessment.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant applied for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa, which was refused by the delegate due to not meeting health criteria.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant was found not to have met the health criteria, specifically PIC 4005(1)(aa) for undertaking a required medical assessment.
What the tribunal established
If new evidence shows that the applicant meets health criteria after a refusal, the decision can be set aside and remitted for reconsideration.
[2026] ARTA 21042026-08-25AffirmedThe applicant claimed ignorance of the altered bank statement, attributing it to a former agent, while the Tribunal found the applicant acted with indifference and…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant sought review of a decision to refuse a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa (Subclass 500) due to the submission of a 'bogus' bank statement in a prior tourist visa application.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant claimed ignorance of the altered bank statement, attributing it to a former agent, while the Tribunal found the applicant acted with indifference and authorised the agent to act on his behalf.
What the tribunal established
A visa applicant is considered to have 'caused to be given' a bogus document if they authorised an agent to act on their behalf and showed wilful blindness to their obligations, even if unaware of specific alterations.
[2026] ARTA 21122026-08-25RemittedThe dispute concerned whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay in Australia temporarily and would comply with visa conditions, as required by cl 500.212 of the…
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Mr Aman Deswal, applied for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa to study in Australia. The delegate refused the visa on the grounds that the applicant did not meet the genuine temporary entrant (GTE) criteria.
The question before the tribunal
The dispute concerned whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay in Australia temporarily and would comply with visa conditions, as required by cl 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
A genuine temporary entrant must intend to stay in Australia temporarily and comply with visa conditions, considering their circumstances, immigration history, and the value of the course to their future.
[2026] ARTA 21082026-08-23AffirmedThe delegate refused the visa on the grounds that the applicant was not a genuine temporary entrant (GTE) as required by cl 500.212.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, Mr Tejbir Singh, applied for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa to study in Australia.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused the visa on the grounds that the applicant was not a genuine temporary entrant (GTE) as required by cl 500.212.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal must assess whether the applicant genuinely intends to stay in Australia temporarily, considering their circumstances, immigration history, and the value of the course to their future.
[2026] ARTA 21112026-08-22RemittedThe delegate 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 result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
The applicant, Mr Dario Alejandro Torres Christancho, applied for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa to undertake study in Australia.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate 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, specifically that the applicant did not intend to genuinely stay temporarily in Australia.
What the tribunal established
A genuine temporary entrant criterion requires the applicant to intend genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily and to comply with visa conditions.
[2026] ARTA 19982026-08-11AffirmedWhether the applicant’s change of course to a lower AQF level breached condition 8202(2)(b) and justified visa cancellation.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a 21‑year‑old Indian student on a subclass 500 visa, changed from a Level 7 Bachelor to a Level 6 Advanced Diploma and later a Level 8 Graduate Diploma, breaching condition 8202(2)(b).
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant’s change of course to a lower AQF level breached condition 8202(2)(b) and justified visa cancellation.
What the tribunal established
Under s 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act, a visa may be cancelled if the holder fails to comply with a condition, and the decision‑maker must have regard to s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A when exercising that discretion.
[2026] ARTA 19762026-08-07RemittedWhether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Ms Rajdeep Kaur, an Indian citizen, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study a Bachelor of Business in Australia after earlier horticulture courses were not completed.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
Under s 65 of the Migration Act and clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, a decision maker must be satisfied that the applicant is a genuine temporary entrant, applying the factors set out in Direction No 108.
[2026] ARTA 19992026-08-07Set asideWhether the applicant had complied with condition 8202(2)(b) by remaining enrolled in a registered course at the same or higher AQF level, thereby avoiding cancellation…
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a holder of a Subclass 500 student visa, faced cancellation because the Department alleged he had not maintained enrolment in a course at the required AQF level.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant had complied with condition 8202(2)(b) by remaining enrolled in a registered course at the same or higher AQF level, thereby avoiding cancellation under s 116(1)(b).
What the tribunal established
A student visa may be cancelled under s 116(1)(b) only if the holder fails to comply with condition 8202(2)(b), and the Minister must consider matters under s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A when determining compliance.
[2026] ARTA 19952026-08-07Set asideWhether the breach of condition 8202(2)(a) justifies cancelling the student visa.
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
The applicant, a Nepalese student on a subclass 500 visa, was not enrolled full‑time for 11 months due to financial and mental‑health difficulties, leading to a cancellation notice.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the breach of condition 8202(2)(a) justifies cancelling the student visa.
What the tribunal established
Under s 116(1)(b) a visa may be cancelled for breach of a condition, but s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A require the decision‑maker to consider all relevant circumstances, including evidence of attempts to comply, before exercising the discretion to cancel.
[2026] ARTA 19772026-08-06RemittedWhether the applicant satisfied clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations (genuine temporary entrant) for the subclass 500 visa.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
A 29‑year‑old Nepalese citizen, previously on a subclass 485 visa, applied for a subclass 500 student visa after separating from his ex‑wife to study civil construction in Australia.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations (genuine temporary entrant) for the subclass 500 visa.
What the tribunal established
Under s 65 of the Migration Act and Direction No 108, a student visa applicant must satisfy clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, demonstrating a genuine intention to stay temporarily and to comply with visa conditions.
[2026] ARTA 21152026-08-06AffirmedThe delegate refused the visa on the grounds that the applicant did not genuinely intend to stay temporarily in Australia, citing her immigration history and study…
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, who has been in Australia for over ten years and previously held student and graduate visas, applied for a further student visa to study nursing.
The question before the tribunal
The delegate refused the visa on the grounds that the applicant did not genuinely intend to stay temporarily in Australia, citing her immigration history and study pathway.
What the tribunal established
The Tribunal must assess whether the applicant genuinely intends to stay in Australia temporarily, considering their circumstances, immigration history, and any other relevant matters.
[2026] ARTA 19572026-08-05RemittedWhether the job offer letter constitutes a bogus document under s 5(1) and satisfies Public Interest Criterion 4020(1).
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Ms Ling Zhang, a Chinese citizen, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa but was refused due to an alleged bogus job offer document.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the job offer letter constitutes a bogus document under s 5(1) and satisfies Public Interest Criterion 4020(1).
What the tribunal established
A document is a ‘bogus document’ under s 5(1) of the Migration Act only if it is counterfeit, altered, or supplied because of a false or misleading statement; a poorly drafted offer is not per se bogus.
[2026] ARTA 18362026-08-05RemittedWhether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant requirement under cl 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Mr Kanda, a 42‑year‑old Indian business owner, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study a Graduate Diploma of Management in Australia.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant requirement under cl 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
Under cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, a student visa applicant must be a genuine temporary entrant, intending to stay temporarily and comply with visa conditions, assessed against the factors in Ministerial Direction 108.
[2026] ARTA 19362026-08-04RemittedWhether the applicant satisfied the English language proficiency requirement under cl 500.213 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Ms Natalia Daza Agudelo, a Colombian national, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study in Australia but was refused for not meeting the English language requirement.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied the English language proficiency requirement under cl 500.213 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
An applicant must satisfy cl 500.213 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations by providing evidence of the required English language score unless exempted by a specified legislative instrument.
[2026] ARTA 19782026-08-04AffirmedWhether the applicant gave or caused a bogus document and false or misleading information, breaching PIC 4020(1) of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Mr Aqib Mumtaz applied for a subclass 500 student visa but was found to have submitted a bogus completion certificate and a false statutory declaration.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant gave or caused a bogus document and false or misleading information, breaching PIC 4020(1) of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
Under s 65 of the Migration Act and PIC 4020(1) of the Migration Regulations, a person must not give or cause a bogus document or false or misleading information in a material particular, regardless of knowledge or intent.
[2026] ARTA 18482026-08-04AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied the enrolment requirement under clause 500.211(a) (and the genuine temporary entrant requirement) for the Subclass 500 visa.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a 37‑year‑old Indian citizen, sought a Subclass 500 student visa but had no current enrolment in a registered full‑time course of study.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied the enrolment requirement under clause 500.211(a) (and the genuine temporary entrant requirement) for the Subclass 500 visa.
What the tribunal established
A Subclass 500 student visa may only be granted if the applicant is enrolled in a full‑time registered course of study at the time of decision, as required by clause 500.211(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.
[2026] ARTA 19542026-08-03AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied the enrolment requirement (cl 500.211) and the genuine temporary entrant criterion (cl 500.212) for a student visa.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, a 34‑year‑old Thai citizen, sought a Subclass 500 student visa to study accounting courses but was refused and later failed to appear at her Tribunal hearing.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied the enrolment requirement (cl 500.211) and the genuine temporary entrant criterion (cl 500.212) for a student visa.
What the tribunal established
A student visa applicant must be enrolled in a full‑time registered course of study at the time of the decision (cl 500.211(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations); failure to do so justifies affirmation of refusal.
[2026] ARTA 18462026-08-03AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied Public Interest Criterion 4020(1) and clause 500.217 of the Migration Regulations for the student visa.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
An Indian national applied for a subclass 500 student visa after holding a transit (771) and visitor (600) visa, but was alleged to have provided bogus documents in his earlier transit visa application.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied Public Interest Criterion 4020(1) and clause 500.217 of the Migration Regulations for the student visa.
What the tribunal established
PIC 4020(1) prohibits any applicant from giving or causing a bogus document or false information to be provided, regardless of knowledge, and a waiver under PIC 4020(4) is only available for compelling or compassionate circumstances.
[2026] ARTA 19062026-08-03AffirmedWhether the Tribunal should dismiss the review application due to the applicant’s failure to attend the scheduled hearing.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Mr Shoaib Abdul Latif Khan applied for a subclass 500 student visa which was refused and later failed to attend the tribunal hearing.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the Tribunal should dismiss the review application due to the applicant’s failure to attend the scheduled hearing.
What the tribunal established
Under s 99 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 a review application is dismissed and the decision under review affirmed when the applicant fails to attend the scheduled hearing.
[2026] ARTA 19562026-07-31RemittedWhether she satisfies the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
A 27‑year‑old Colombian woman studying a Diploma in Early Childhood Education in Australia, with a job offer in Colombia, sought a Subclass 500 student visa after previous student visas.
The question before the tribunal
Whether she satisfies the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
An applicant must satisfy clause 500.212(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, demonstrating a genuine intention to stay temporarily, assessed in accordance with Direction 108 and sections 65, 367 and 499 of the Migration Act.
[2026] ARTA 18532026-07-28AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied the English language proficiency requirement under cl 500.213 of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Mr Hari Buduja, a Nepalese citizen, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa but failed to provide evidence of the required English language proficiency.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied the English language proficiency requirement under cl 500.213 of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
A student visa applicant must satisfy cl 500.213 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations by providing evidence of the required English language proficiency unless an exemption applies.
[2026] ARTA 19342026-07-27AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied the enrolment requirement under clause 500.211(a) of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Mr Sohaib Ahmed, a 33‑year‑old Pakistani national, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa but was not enrolled in a current course of study.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied the enrolment requirement under clause 500.211(a) of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
A Subclass 500 visa may be granted only if the applicant is enrolled in a full‑time registered course at the time of decision, as required by clause 500.211(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, and PRISMS records are taken as reliable evidence of enrolment.
[2026] ARTA 18542026-07-27AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion under cl 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
A 41‑year‑old Thai woman who arrived in 2017, has held multiple student visas and is currently enrolled in an Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management, claiming she will return to Thailand after study.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion under cl 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
A student visa may be granted only if the decision‑maker is satisfied, having regard to Direction 108, that the applicant is a genuine temporary entrant as required by cl 500.212(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations.
[2026] ARTA 19352026-07-24AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations – the genuine temporary entrant requirement.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Mr Ebenezer Smith, a 33‑year‑old Indian painter, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study a Diploma in Building and Construction while intending to return to India to start a business.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations – the genuine temporary entrant requirement.
What the tribunal established
Under s 65 of the Migration Act and Direction 108 made under s 499, an applicant must satisfy clause 500.212(a) by demonstrating a genuine intention to stay temporarily in Australia, considering personal circumstances, immigration history and other relevant matters.
[2026] ARTA 19372026-07-23AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations (genuine temporary entrant) for the student visa.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Mr Uttam Manjunath Shetty, an Indian national, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study a Master of IT in Australia but was refused on genuine temporary entrant grounds.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations (genuine temporary entrant) for the student visa.
What the tribunal established
A student visa applicant must satisfy clause 500.212(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, assessed against Direction No 108, to demonstrate a genuine intention to stay temporarily in Australia.
[2026] ARTA 18502026-07-23AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant criterion under clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Ms Devi Ketankumar Patel, a 26‑year‑old Indian national, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study an MBA after previously holding a subclass 485 visa and separating from her husband.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant criterion under clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
A student visa applicant must satisfy clause 500.212(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, requiring a genuine intention to stay temporarily in Australia, considering personal circumstances, immigration history and other relevant matters.
[2026] ARTA 18522026-07-23Set asideWhether the applicant complied with visa condition 8208, which requires ministerial written approval for critical‑technology related study.
The result
The tribunal decided in the applicant's favour: it set aside the original decision and replaced it with its own.
The situation
A Chinese national holding a subclass 500 student visa had his visa cancelled for alleged breach of condition 8208 relating to critical‑technology study and sought merits review.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant complied with visa condition 8208, which requires ministerial written approval for critical‑technology related study.
What the tribunal established
Under s 116(1)(b) the Minister may cancel a visa for non‑compliance with a condition, but s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A require the Tribunal to consider all relevant circumstances, including hardship and the purpose of the stay, before exercising the power.
[2026] ARTA 18382026-07-22RemittedWhether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.
The situation
Ms Komalpreet Kaur, an Indian national, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa which was refused on the basis that she did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion, and the Tribunal has now set aside that refusal and remitted the application for reconsideration.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
A student visa applicant must satisfy clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, requiring a genuine temporary entrant intention assessed against the factors set out in Direction 108.
[2026] ARTA 19322026-07-21AffirmedWhether the Tribunal should reinstate the dismissed review application despite the applicants' absence and lack of evidence of current enrolment.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicants failed to attend a scheduled Tribunal hearing for their subclass 500 student visa review and later sought reinstatement citing a family medical emergency.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the Tribunal should reinstate the dismissed review application despite the applicants' absence and lack of evidence of current enrolment.
What the tribunal established
Under s 99 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 a review application may be dismissed for non‑appearance, and under s 368C(2‑3) the Tribunal may only reinstate it if the applicant provides a reasonable excuse and the application has sufficient merit.
[2026] ARTA 19332026-07-21AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied Public Interest Criterion 4020(1) by not providing a bogus document and whether any waiver applied.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicants applied for a subclass 500 student visa using a Personal Employment Income Certificate that was found to be non‑genuine, leading to a refusal.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfied Public Interest Criterion 4020(1) by not providing a bogus document and whether any waiver applied.
What the tribunal established
A person who provides a bogus document breaches Public Interest Criterion 4020(1) and the visa must be refused unless the requirement is waived on compelling or compassionate circumstances (s 5(1) Migration Act 1958).
[2026] ARTA 18512026-07-17AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
Miss Pahulpreet Kaur, a 23‑year‑old Indian student, seeks a Subclass 500 student visa to continue graduate studies while working as a head chef in Melbourne.
The question before the tribunal
Whether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations.
What the tribunal established
Under s 65 of the Migration Act and clause 500.212(a) of the Migration Regulations, a student visa applicant must intend to stay temporarily in Australia, taking into account personal circumstances, immigration history and other relevant matters.
[2026] ARTA 14252026-07-16AffirmedThe applicant was not determined to be a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student because she was not enrolled in a course of study at the time of decision.
The result
The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.
The situation
The applicant, Miss Luisa Fernanda Velez, applied for a Student visa to undertake study in Australia but was refused due to not meeting the genuine temporary entrant requirement.
The question before the tribunal
The applicant was not determined to be a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student because she was not enrolled in a course of study at the time of decision.
What the tribunal established
The applicant must be enrolled in a course of study at the time of decision to meet the requirements of cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.
Track visa decisions as they land
Our pipeline reads new tribunal decisions from the official record every week and folds them into the numbers on these pages. Subscribers get the important rule and outcome shifts in plain English. Free, unsubscribe anytime.
Where do you actually stand?
Tribunal outcomes show how the rules are applied, but your own position depends on your visa, your points and your evidence.