Kyrtellis (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a Contributory Parent (Temporary) (Class UT) visa, subclass 173. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the health requirements stipulated by Public Interest Criterion (PIC) 4005 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant was free from tuberculosis, free from any disease or condition that posed a threat to public health or the Australian community, and free from any disease or condition that would likely result in significant costs to the Australian community for healthcare or community services, or prejudice access to such services for Australian citizens or permanent residents. The Tribunal also had to consider whether a Medical Officer of the Commonwealth (MOC) opinion was required and, if so, whether it was correctly applied.

The Tribunal reasoned that for the specified temporary visa, certain healthcare and community services were not excluded from consideration under PIC 4005(3). Regulation 2.25A mandates that the Tribunal seek the opinion of a MOC unless specific exceptions apply, and where such an opinion is sought, it must be taken as correct, provided the MOC applied the correct statutory test. In this instance, a MOC opinion was required, and the Tribunal found that the applicant had not satisfied the requirements of PIC 4005.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the applicant was not granted the Contributory Parent (Temporary) (Class UT) visa.