MALOLES (Migration)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 4116
•13 September 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
MALOLES (Migration) [2018] AATA 4116
[2018] AATA 4116
13 September 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) Subclass 572 (Vocational Education and Training Sector) visa. The applicant sought review of a decision made by the Tribunal regarding their eligibility for the visa.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence of adequate health insurance arrangements in Australia for the duration of their intended stay, as required by clause 572.225 of Schedule 2 to the relevant regulations.
The Tribunal considered evidence that the applicant had submitted a letter from NIB OSHC confirming payment for Overseas Student Health Cover, with coverage commencing in October 2015 and expiring in September 2020. Further, records indicated the applicant was continuing their studies and approved to commence a new course, with completion dates falling within the health cover period. Based on this evidence, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant had met the health insurance criterion. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant met clause 572.225.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence of adequate health insurance arrangements in Australia for the duration of their intended stay, as required by clause 572.225 of Schedule 2 to the relevant regulations.
The Tribunal considered evidence that the applicant had submitted a letter from NIB OSHC confirming payment for Overseas Student Health Cover, with coverage commencing in October 2015 and expiring in September 2020. Further, records indicated the applicant was continuing their studies and approved to commence a new course, with completion dates falling within the health cover period. Based on this evidence, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant had met the health insurance criterion. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the application for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant met clause 572.225.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
MALOLES (Migration) [2018] AATA 4116
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0