SUBCLASS 500 · 674 DECISIONS

Student visa: what the tribunal decides

Real outcomes from 674 appealed subclass 500 decisions

When a student visa decision is refused or cancelled, the applicant can ask the tribunal to review it. Our pipeline holds 674 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

674
decisions on record
9%
set aside
42%
remitted
2024–2026
years covered

Across these 674 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.

Confirmed the original decision (the applicant lost) · 330 (49%)Set the decision aside (the applicant won) · 64 (9%)Sent back for reconsideration (a fresh chance for the applicant) · 280 (42%)
OutcomeDecisionsShare
Upheld29643.9%
Remitted28041.5%
Set aside649.5%
Affirmed345.0%

Counts from 674 decisions captured by our pipeline, as at 2026-06-28. 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.

YearDecisionsSet aside
20261189%
20252909%
202426611%

Most-cited legislation and rules

The provisions of the Migration Act and Regulations cited most often across the 71 decisions on this topic that record their citations. The number is how many of those decisions cite it.

s 65 54cl 500.212 37s 499 30reg 2.43A 13cl 500.611 11cl 500.211 11s 116(1)(b) 10s 116(1A) 10s 116 7cl 500.212(a) 7

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 10832026-06-05AffirmedThe applicant was found to have provided a counterfeit Leave Approval Memo, which led to the refusal of his Student visa application.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

The applicant, Mr Ahmad Firdaus Mohd Jamadi, had his Student visa application refused due to providing a bogus document with his previous visitor visa application.

The question before the tribunal

The applicant was found to have provided a counterfeit Leave Approval Memo, which led to the refusal of his Student visa application.

What the tribunal established

The applicant must satisfy Public Interest Criterion 4020, which requires that they have not provided a bogus document or false information.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 10882026-06-02AffirmedThe delegate was not satisfied that the applicant had a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily, and thus found that the applicant did not satisfy 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 26-year-old Indian national, applied for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under subclass 500 to undertake study in Australia.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant had a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily, and thus found that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements of cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion requires the applicant to demonstrate a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 10872026-06-02RemittedWhether 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

A 30‑year‑old Colombian architect applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study project management in Australia and was refused on the basis that she was not a genuine temporary entrant.

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

An applicant must satisfy cl 500.212(a) by genuinely intending to stay temporarily, assessed against all relevant factors in Direction 108, not merely as a checklist.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 10902026-06-01AffirmedThe applicant's intention to stay in Australia temporarily was in dispute, as well as her enrolment in a registered course of study.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

The applicant, a 52-year-old Taiwanese citizen, applied for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa to study in Australia but was refused due to not meeting the genuine temporary entrant requirement.

The question before the tribunal

The applicant's intention to stay in Australia temporarily was in dispute, as well as her enrolment in a registered course of study.

What the tribunal established

To be granted a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa, an applicant must be enrolled in a registered course of study and genuinely intend to stay in Australia temporarily.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 10932026-05-28RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the primary applicant was a genuine temporary entrant, citing concerns about her immigration history and the value of the course to…

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 married couple from India applied for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas to study in Australia, but their applications were refused due to concerns about their genuine temporary entrant status.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate was not satisfied that the primary applicant was a genuine temporary entrant, citing concerns about her immigration history and the value of the course to her future.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion requires the applicant to demonstrate a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily and comply with visa conditions.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 10802026-05-27AffirmedThe applicant's inability to provide sufficient evidence of financial capacity and genuine access to funds was in dispute.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

The applicant, Ms Srijana Rana, applied for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa under subclass 500, but was refused due to not meeting the financial requirements.

The question before the tribunal

The applicant's inability to provide sufficient evidence of financial capacity and genuine access to funds was in dispute.

What the tribunal established

The applicant must meet the financial requirements for the visa, including demonstrating sufficient funds to meet their costs and expenses during their intended stay in Australia.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 10812026-05-26AffirmedThe delegate was not satisfied that the applicant intended to stay in Australia temporarily, prompting the applicant to appeal the decision.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

The applicant, Mr Khaja Zameeruddin, applied for a Student (Temporary) visa to study in Australia but was refused due to concerns he was not a genuine temporary entrant.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant intended to stay in Australia temporarily, prompting the applicant to appeal the decision.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion requires the applicant to demonstrate they intend to stay in Australia temporarily, considering their circumstances, immigration history, and other relevant matters.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 10502026-05-25AffirmedThe applicant's intention to stay in Australia temporarily as a genuine student is in dispute.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

A Nepalese husband's application for a Student visa is under review after his wife, the primary applicant, passed away.

The question before the tribunal

The applicant's intention to stay in Australia temporarily as a genuine student is in dispute.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion requires the applicant to demonstrate a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 10842026-05-25AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant requirement under cl 500.212(a).

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

Colombian applicant on a student visa studied English, attempted to enrol in Painting and Decorating and later Carpentry, but his further student visa was refused.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant requirement under cl 500.212(a).

What the tribunal established

A student visa applicant must satisfy cl 500.212(a) by genuinely intending to stay temporarily, considering personal circumstances, immigration history and other relevant matters, guided by Direction No 69.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9702026-05-21Set asideWhether the breach of condition 8202 (full‑time enrolment) justified cancellation of the 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 was a student on a Subclass 500 visa who had not been enrolled full‑time due to ill health and course changes.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the breach of condition 8202 (full‑time enrolment) justified cancellation of the visa.

What the tribunal established

Under s 116(1)(b) a visa may be cancelled for non‑compliance with a condition, but the decision‑maker must have regard to all relevant circumstances prescribed in s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 10952026-05-21Set asideThe applicant changed her field of study from leadership and management to hospitality and cookery, and did not maintain enrolment in a course at the required level…

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 31-year-old Philippines woman, had her Subclass 500 (Student) visa cancelled due to breaching condition 8202 by not maintaining enrolment in a registered course at the same or higher level as the course for which the visa was granted.

The question before the tribunal

The applicant changed her field of study from leadership and management to hospitality and cookery, and did not maintain enrolment in a course at the required level, leading to the cancellation of her visa.

What the tribunal established

The decision-maker must consider all relevant circumstances, including prescribed matters, in determining whether to cancel a visa under s 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act 1958.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9682026-05-15AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfies the enrolment requirement and the genuine temporary entrant criterion for a Subclass 500 student visa.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

Ms Nguyen, a 32‑year‑old Vietnamese national, has been in Australia since 2015 undertaking a series of unrelated courses and is currently not enrolled in a registered course of study.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the applicant satisfies the enrolment requirement and the genuine temporary entrant criterion for a Subclass 500 student visa.

What the tribunal established

A Subclass 500 visa is only grantable if the applicant is enrolled in a registered course of study (cl 500.211(a)) and is a genuine temporary entrant (cl 500.212(a)) under the Migration Regulations 1994.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9672026-05-13RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, citing concerns about his immigration history, family ties…

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, a 22-year-old Nepalese citizen, applied for a Student visa to study in Australia, but the application was refused due to concerns about his genuine temporary entrant status.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, citing concerns about his immigration history, family ties, and economic incentives to return to Nepal.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion requires the applicant to demonstrate a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily, having regard to their circumstances, immigration history, and other relevant matters.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9662026-05-12RemittedWhether the primary applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant criterion 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

A Malaysian couple applied for Subclass 500 student visas after arriving on tourist visas, claiming the primary applicant intends to study a Diploma of Business and return home.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the primary applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant criterion under cl 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.

What the tribunal established

An applicant must satisfy cl 500.212(a)‑(c) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, assessed in accordance with Direction No 108, to be a genuine temporary entrant for a Subclass 500 visa.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9142026-05-11AffirmedWhether the breach of condition 8202(2)(a) justified the Minister’s discretion to cancel the student visa.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

A Bangladeshi student on a subclass 500 visa failed to maintain enrolment in a full‑time registered course and did not meet condition 8202(2)(a).

The question before the tribunal

Whether the breach of condition 8202(2)(a) justified the Minister’s discretion to cancel the student visa.

What the tribunal established

s 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act gives the Minister discretion to cancel a visa for non‑compliance, and that discretion must be exercised reasonably.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9382026-05-11RemittedThe delegate refused the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion under cl 500.212.

The result

The tribunal sent the case back to Home Affairs to be decided again with directions. The applicant got another chance.

The situation

An Indian national living in Adelaide, enrolled in a Diploma of Community Services, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to complete his studies.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate refused the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion under cl 500.212.

What the tribunal established

A student visa applicant must satisfy cl 500.212(a)-(c) of Schedule 2, meaning they must genuinely intend to stay temporarily, comply with visa conditions, and have no other adverse matters, assessed in accordance with Direction No 108.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8102026-05-08AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion (cl 500.212) for a Subclass 500 student visa.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

An Indonesian applicant has been undertaking a series of VET courses in Australia for about 14 years and seeks another student visa to continue studying, claiming he will return to open a restaurant in Indonesia.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion (cl 500.212) for a Subclass 500 student visa.

What the tribunal established

A student visa applicant must be a genuine temporary entrant, intending to stay in Australia only temporarily, assessed against the factors in Direction No 108 and clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9022026-05-08RemittedWhether the applicant satisfied the genuine access to funds and financial capacity requirements of cl 500.214 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

A 26‑year‑old single Chinese woman applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study a series of courses in Australia.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the applicant satisfied the genuine access to funds and financial capacity requirements of cl 500.214 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations.

What the tribunal established

An applicant for a Subclass 500 visa must meet cl 500.214(1)‑(3), proving sufficient funds for living costs, course fees and travel and demonstrating genuine access to those funds.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8622026-05-07RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, leading to the refusal of the visa 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, an Indian citizen, applied for a Student visa to study in Australia, but the application was refused due to concerns about his genuine temporary entrant status.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student, leading to the refusal of the visa application.

What the tribunal established

The applicant must be a genuine temporary entrant and a genuine student to meet the criteria for a Subclass 500 visa.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9402026-05-07AffirmedThe delegate refused the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212 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

An Indian former teacher applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study business qualifications and later start a tuition centre or e‑commerce business in India.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate refused the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.

What the tribunal established

A student visa applicant must be a genuine temporary entrant, satisfying clause 500.212 and the factors in Direction No 108, otherwise the decision to refuse may be affirmed.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9452026-05-07AffirmedWhether the breach of visa condition 8202 (enrolment) justified cancellation of 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

Bangladeshi student who failed to maintain enrolment in a full‑time registered course for over ten months and had multiple course cancellations.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the breach of visa condition 8202 (enrolment) justified cancellation of the subclass 500 visa.

What the tribunal established

Under s 116(1)(b) the Minister may cancel a visa for non‑compliance with a condition, and must consider the matters prescribed in s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A before exercising that power.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9512026-05-06AffirmedWhether the applicant gave, or caused to be given, bogus documents and therefore failed to meet Public Interest Criterion 4020(1).

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

Veronica Chepngetich, a Kenyan citizen, applied for a Subclass 500 student visa but was refused because documents supporting her application were found to be bogus.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the applicant gave, or caused to be given, bogus documents and therefore failed to meet Public Interest Criterion 4020(1).

What the tribunal established

Under s 5(1) of the Migration Act and PIC 4020(1), a visa applicant fails the criterion if a bogus document is given or caused to be given, regardless of the applicant’s knowledge or intent.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8642026-05-05RemittedThe delegate refused the visa on the ground that the applicant did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion under cl 500.212.

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 Colombian applicant previously held a student visa and applied for a Subclass 500 visa to continue her studies in Australia.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate refused the visa on the ground that the applicant did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion under cl 500.212.

What the tribunal established

A student visa applicant must satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion in cl 500.212 of Schedule 2, applying the factors set out in Direction No 108, to be granted a Subclass 500 visa.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8612026-05-04Set asideWhether the breach of student visa condition 8202(2)(a) justified cancellation of the Subclass 500 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 24‑year‑old Bangladeshi student, was not enrolled in a full‑time registered course from October 2024 and faced visa cancellation.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the breach of student visa condition 8202(2)(a) justified cancellation of the Subclass 500 visa.

What the tribunal established

The Minister may cancel a visa under s 116(1)(b) for non‑compliance with a condition, but the discretion must be exercised reasonably and the decision‑maker must have regard to s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9352026-05-04RemittedWhether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion 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

An Indian male who has studied and worked in Australia for several years applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to complete a Diploma of Automotive Management.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion under clause 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.

What the tribunal established

A student visa applicant must intend genuinely to stay temporarily in Australia and intend to comply with visa conditions, assessed against the factors in Direction No 108 and the requirements of clause 500.212.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9492026-05-01AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied 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

An Indian national applied for a Subclass 500 student visa after four years of multiple incomplete courses and limited work experience in Australia.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the applicant satisfied 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) – they must intend genuinely to stay temporarily in Australia, considering their personal circumstances, immigration history and any other relevant matters.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8652026-04-29AffirmedThe applicant's intention to stay in Australia temporarily for study was in dispute, with the delegate concerned that the applicant had applied for a Student visa to…

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

The applicant, a 49-year-old man from Vietnam, applied for a Student visa in December 2023, but the delegate refused the application due to concerns that the applicant did not intend to stay in Australia temporarily for study.

The question before the tribunal

The applicant's intention to stay in Australia temporarily for study was in dispute, with the delegate concerned that the applicant had applied for a Student visa to stay in Australia for reasons other than study.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications requires the applicant to demonstrate a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily for study.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9422026-04-29RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that the applicant's proposed studies would enhance his career prospects or remuneration on return to the Philippines, and questioned his…

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, a 29-year-old Filipino male, applied for a Student visa to study in Australia but was refused due to concerns about his genuine temporary entrant status.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant's proposed studies would enhance his career prospects or remuneration on return to the Philippines, and questioned his genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion requires the applicant to demonstrate a genuine intention to stay in Australia temporarily, having regard to their circumstances, immigration history, and other relevant matters.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9442026-04-29AffirmedWhether the breach of student visa condition 8202(2)(a) justifies cancellation of her visa under s 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

Miss Kasfi Rahman, a Bangladeshi student on a subclass 500 visa, ceased enrolment in a full‑time registered course from 4 March 2024 after financial hardship and a scam.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the breach of student visa condition 8202(2)(a) justifies cancellation of her visa under s 116(1)(b) of the Migration Act.

What the tribunal established

Under s 116(1)(b) the Minister may cancel a visa for non‑compliance with a condition, but the discretion must be exercised reasonably and the decision‑maker must have regard to matters prescribed in s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8382026-04-24AffirmedWhether the applicant satisfied the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212 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

An Indian 28‑year‑old male applied for a Subclass 500 student visa to study civil construction design in Australia.

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(a) of Schedule 2, assessing genuine temporary entrant status against the factors set out in Direction No 108.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8592026-04-24AffirmedWhether the breach of condition 8202(2)(a) justified cancellation of his student visa.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

A Bangladeshi student on a Subclass 500 visa was not enrolled full‑time due to serious eye surgeries and financial hardship.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the breach of condition 8202(2)(a) justified cancellation of his student visa.

What the tribunal established

A statutory discretion to cancel a visa under s 116 must be exercised reasonably, taking into account prescribed matters in s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A and the applicant’s circumstances.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9122026-04-24RemittedWhether the primary applicant satisfies 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

A Bhutanese couple applied for Subclass 500 student visas, the primary applicant having changed courses and faced study gaps but providing evidence of genuine study intentions and strong ties to Bhutan.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the primary applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant requirement under cl 500.212 of the Migration Regulations.

What the tribunal established

The Tribunal must be satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay temporarily in Australia and will comply with visa conditions, applying Direction No 108 and cl 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9372026-04-24RemittedThe delegate was not satisfied that Mr Raman was a genuine applicant for entry and stay in Australia as a student.

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 Amit Raman, is an Indian national who applied for a Student visa to undertake study in Australia.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate was not satisfied that Mr Raman was a genuine applicant for entry and stay in Australia as a student.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion requires the Minister to be satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9462026-04-22Set asideWhether the breach of student visa condition 8202(2)(a) justified cancellation of the 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

A Bangladeshi student on a Subclass 500 visa was not enrolled full‑time from April 2024 to February 2025 due to his grandfather’s death and enrolment delays.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the breach of student visa condition 8202(2)(a) justified cancellation of the visa.

What the tribunal established

Under s 116(1)(b) the Minister may cancel a visa for breach of a condition, but s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A require the decision‑maker to consider all relevant circumstances and exercise the discretion reasonably.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8082026-04-20RemittedWhether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion under clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 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

An 18‑year‑old Sri Lankan citizen who arrived on a visitor visa, has completed Certificate III and IV and is studying a Diploma of Hospitality Management, with family in Australia and a job offer in Sri Lanka.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion under clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 of the Migration Regulations.

What the tribunal established

The decision maker must be satisfied that the applicant is a genuine temporary entrant by applying the factors in Direction No 108 and meeting each element of cl 500.212(a)‑(c) of Schedule 2.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9042026-04-20Set asideWhether the breach of condition 8202(2)(a) justifies cancellation of 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

A Bangladeshi student on a subclass 500 visa ceased enrolment in a full‑time course after a divorce and severe mental health issues.

The question before the tribunal

Whether the breach of condition 8202(2)(a) justifies cancellation of the student visa.

What the tribunal established

A visa may be cancelled under s 116(1)(b) only after the decision‑maker has regard to s 116(1A) and reg 2.43A, and should not be exercised where the breach arose from circumstances beyond the visa holder’s control.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9062026-04-20RemittedThe delegate refused the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212 of the 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 39‑year‑old Colombian former nun is studying community services in Australia while working in aged‑care and seeks a Subclass 500 student visa.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate refused the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant requirement under clause 500.212 of the Regulations.

What the tribunal established

An applicant must satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion set out in clause 500.212 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations, assessed in accordance with Direction No 108 under s 499 of the Migration Act.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8112026-04-17RemittedThe applicant did not provide evidence of an approved English language test, but claimed exemption under paragraph 6(1)(d)(ii) of LIN 24/022 due to completing a…

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, Ms Susmita Baniya, applied for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa but was refused due to not meeting the English language proficiency requirements.

The question before the tribunal

The applicant did not provide evidence of an approved English language test, but claimed exemption under paragraph 6(1)(d)(ii) of LIN 24/022 due to completing a substantial component of a Certificate IV course in Australia and in English.

What the tribunal established

The Tribunal must consider whether the applicant has successfully completed a substantial component of a course leading to an Australian Qualifications Framework qualification at Certificate IV level or higher, conducted in Australia and in English, while holding a student visa.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 9072026-04-17AffirmedThe applicant's limited academic progress and failure to provide sufficient evidence of enrolment in a course of study were in dispute.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

The applicant, a 43-year-old male national of India, applied for a Student visa to undertake further studies in Australia but was refused due to not meeting the genuine temporary entrant requirement.

The question before the tribunal

The applicant's limited academic progress and failure to provide sufficient evidence of enrolment in a course of study were in dispute.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications requires the Minister to be satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

[2026] ARTA 8072026-04-16AffirmedThe delegate refused the visa application due to concerns the applicant did not intend to stay temporarily in Australia as a student.

The result

The tribunal agreed with the original decision. The refusal or cancellation stood and the applicant was unsuccessful.

The situation

The applicant, a 24-year-old Vietnamese woman, applied for a Student visa after arriving in Australia on a visitor visa and having a child with an Australian permanent resident.

The question before the tribunal

The delegate refused the visa application due to concerns the applicant did not intend to stay temporarily in Australia as a student.

What the tribunal established

The genuine temporary entrant criterion requires the applicant to demonstrate a genuine intention to stay temporarily in Australia.

Read the full decision on AustLII →

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.

Check my real chances →  ·  Browse all tribunal topics →