1609731 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Subclass 602 Medical Treatment visa made by a national of Jordan. The applicant sought to remain in Australia for medical treatment, specifically counselling. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 602.213 of the Migration Regulations, which applies to applicants who are in Australia at the time of their visa application.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant satisfied the conditions of clause 602.213. This involved assessing whether the applicant held a substantive temporary visa at the time of application, or if not, whether she met alternative criteria. These alternative criteria included not having held a Subclass 426 or 403 visa as her last substantive visa, and meeting Schedule 3 criteria 3001, 3003, 3004, and 3005. Additionally, the Tribunal had to consider whether the applicant was medically unfit to depart Australia as per clause 602.212(6).

The Tribunal found that the applicant was in Australia when she applied for the visa and did not hold a substantive temporary visa at that time, having last held a substantive visa in May 2013. It also noted that her last substantive visa was not a Subclass 403 or 426. However, the applicant did not meet the requirements of clause 602.212(6) because she had not turned 50 years of age, a prerequisite for being considered medically unfit to depart under that provision. Furthermore, the Tribunal determined that the applicant did not satisfy Schedule 3 criterion 3001, as there was no evidence to suggest her application was lodged within 28 days of the "relevant day" as defined in the regulations.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the applicant a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa, as she failed to meet the necessary criteria for the visa grant.