2204513 (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse the applicant a Medical Treatment (Support Person) (Class UB) visa. The applicant, a man from India, had a history of lengthy stays in Australia, including periods of unlawful residence, following the refusal of a previous visa application for himself and his de facto spouse. The current application was made in support of his de facto spouse who also sought a Medical Treatment (Subclass 602) visa, and their son who applied as a support person for the spouse.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for the grant of the Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa, specifically whether the circumstances warranted a favourable decision given the applicant's de facto spouse, whom he intended to support, had been refused a Medical Treatment visa. The Tribunal was also required to consider the applicant's extensive history of unlawful residence in Australia and the lack of evidence provided to support the review application.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the visa. This conclusion was reached because the applicant's de facto spouse, the primary visa holder for medical treatment, had been refused a visa. Consequently, the condition under clause 602.212 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which requires the applicant to be the holder of, or a genuine applicant for, a Medical Treatment (Subclass 602) visa, was not met. The Tribunal also noted that no evidence had been provided by the applicant or his family to support their review application, and the matter proceeded on the papers with the applicant's consent after they indicated they could not attend a scheduled hearing.