Acharya (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Subclass 602 Medical Treatment visa made by Mr Acharya. The applicant sought to remain in Australia temporarily for the purpose of receiving medical treatment for mental health issues. The central dispute was whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was granted, as required by clause 602.215 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant met the criteria for a Subclass 602 visa, specifically whether he genuinely intended to stay temporarily for the stated purpose. This involved assessing whether the applicant had complied with the conditions of his previous visas and whether he intended to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 602 visa. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant was medically unfit to depart Australia, which would exempt him from the genuine temporary stay requirement under clause 602.212(6).

The Tribunal found that the applicant, who was 24 years old, did not meet the criteria for being medically unfit to depart Australia, as he had not applied for a permanent visa and there was no evidence of a permanent or deteriorating disease or condition preventing his departure. Therefore, the genuine temporary stay requirement under clause 602.215 applied. The Tribunal noted that while the applicant had provided some medical evidence of mental health issues and a past motorcycle accident, there was no independent medical evidence demonstrating he had followed treatment recommendations or was currently receiving treatment. The applicant's own evidence indicated he had not sought medical help since 2020. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated a genuine intention to stay temporarily for the purpose of medical treatment.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Subclass 602 Medical Treatment (Visitor) visa.