Ong (Migration)

[2019] AATA 5918

Ong (Migration) [2019] AATA 5918 (17 December 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANT:  Miss Shen Li Emily Ong

CASE NUMBER:  1910234

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2019/1050901

MEMBER:Warren Stooke AM

DATE:17 December 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa.

Statement made on 17 December 2019 at 11:24am

CATCHWORDS

MIGRATION – Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) – Subclass 485 (Temporary Graduate) – health insurance – no health insurance – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2 cl 485.215

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 17 April 2019 to refuse to grant the applicant a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 3 March 2019. Visa Class VC contains Subclass 485. (For visa applications made before 1 July 2013, there is also a Subclass 487, however that subclass is not relevant to the present matter.) The criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa are set out in Part 485 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations). The primary criteria must be satisfied by at least one applicant. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need satisfy only the secondary criteria.

3. The delegate refused to grant the visa on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy cl.485.215 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations because as at 17 April 2019, the applicant did not provide information to indicate that they have adequate arrangements in Australia for health insurance.

4. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 30 October 2019 to give evidence and present arguments.

5. The applicant confirmed to the Tribunal that she had received a copy of the delegate’s decision. In this regard, the applicant stated that she understood that the reason for the refusal was because she had answered ‘no’ to health insurance and did not provide the health insurance information.

6. The applicant advised the Tribunal that she had provided a copy of the delegate’s decision to the Tribunal with her application.

7. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

8. The issue in the present case is whether the applicant has in place appropriate health insurance arrangements to satisfy cl.485.215.

9. The applicant gave evidence that she did have health insurance, as a student, which ended on 15 March 2019. A copy of this documentation was provided to the Tribunal by the applicant that indicated the maintenance of health cover with OSHC from 27 January 2017 to 26 March 2019. [Tribunal File: Folio 39]

10. In addition, the applicant provided documentation that identified the applicant maintained health cover with Allianz from 18 April 2019 with a monthly payment of $75.00. [Tribunal File: Folio 36]

11. The applicant gave evidence at the hearing, which confirmed she did not have health insurance from 15 March to 18 April 2019.

    Health insurance requirements

12. Clause 485.215 requires that when the visa application was made, it was accompanied by evidence that the applicant had adequate arrangements in Australia for health insurance; and secondly, that the applicant has had adequate arrangements in Australia for health insurance since the time the application was made.

13. The applicant provided evidence that confirmed that she did not maintain health insurance between 15 March 2019 and 18 April 2019. However, the Tribunal notes that the applicant had cover up to the 26 March 2019 based upon the documented evidence from OHSC. [Tribunal File: Folio 39]

14. On the basis of the evidence provided by the applicant, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant has not maintained health insurance for the period from 26 March 2019 and 18 April 2019. As such, the Tribunal is satisfied that the criterion in cl.485.215 (1) and cl.485.215 (2) is not met.

15. Therefore the applicant does not satisfy cl.485.215.

16. It follows that the applicant does not satisfy the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 485 visa. As this is the only relevant subclass in this case, the decision under review will be affirmed.

    DECISION

17. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Skilled (Provisional) (Class VC) visa.

    Warren Stooke AM
    Member