Le (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa, Subclass 602, by a 37-year-old man from Vietnam. The applicant sought to remain in Australia temporarily for medical treatment. The primary dispute before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for the grant of this visa, specifically concerning his financial means and the genuine temporary stay requirement.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant possessed adequate means of support for his intended stay in Australia, as required by clause 602.216 of the Migration Regulations, and whether the exception to this requirement under clause 602.212(6) applied. This exception is available to applicants who are in Australia, have turned 50, have applied for a permanent visa and met all criteria except health, and are medically unfit to depart Australia due to a permanent or deteriorating condition. The Tribunal also implicitly considered whether the applicant’s stated purpose for seeking the visa was genuine, given his history of previous visa applications and his long-term presence in Australia.

The Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for the exception under clause 602.212(6). It noted that while the applicant was in Australia and had not turned 50, there was no evidence that he had applied for a permanent visa, met all criteria other than health, or was medically unfit to depart Australia. Consequently, the general requirement for adequate means of support under clause 602.216 applied. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated adequate means of support for his intended stay. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the visa.