CHEN (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa, Subclass 602, made by an applicant who sought to remain in Australia for medical treatment. The decision under review was made by the Tribunal, presided over by Member Angela Cranston.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 602.215 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates that an applicant must genuinely intend to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa is granted. This assessment required the Tribunal to consider the applicant's compliance with previous visa conditions, her intention to comply with the conditions of the Subclass 602 visa, and any other relevant matters, unless she was medically unfit to depart Australia as per clause 602.212(6).

The Tribunal found that the claims made by the applicant lacked essential detail. While the applicant had stated a desire to remain in Australia for treatment of depression, there was no information provided regarding her progress or current situation. Crucially, the applicant failed to appear before the Tribunal despite an invitation, preventing the Tribunal from questioning her further and clarifying her claims. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that there was medical evidence demonstrating the applicant's unfitness to depart, that she was currently seeking medical treatment, or that she genuinely intended to stay temporarily for the stated medical purpose.

As a result of these findings, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the requirements of clause 602.212(6) or 602.215. Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa.