1830270 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa to a citizen of Korea. The applicant had been in Australia since March 1999 and applied for the visa in September 2018, seeking treatment for injuries sustained in a 2015 motor vehicle accident. The delegate refused the visa on 3 October 2018, finding the applicant did not meet the criteria under clause 602.215 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which requires a genuine intention to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose of medical treatment.

The AAT was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the Medical Treatment (Visitor) visa, specifically whether she was medically unfit to depart Australia under clause 602.212(6) and, more broadly, whether she genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose of medical treatment as required by clause 602.215. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant had an outstanding debt to the Commonwealth, which could be a further ground for refusal under clause 602.217(1).

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the visa. It found that the applicant did not meet the requirements of clause 602.212(6) as there was no evidence from a Commonwealth Medical Officer stating she was medically unfit to depart Australia, nor had she applied for a permanent visa for which she met all criteria except health. Crucially, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for medical treatment. This conclusion was based on her extensive migration history in Australia since 1999, her prolonged period of unlawful status (over 12 years), ongoing protection visa proceedings, and her failure to depart Australia after the period of intended medical treatment had passed. The Tribunal found this history demonstrated a clear intention to remain in Australia permanently, not temporarily for medical purposes, and accepted that adequate medical care was available in South Korea.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the applicant was not granted the Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa.