PRAJAPATI (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa made by an applicant who had remained in Australia since 2008, having previously held a Student visa and unsuccessfully applied for a Protection visa. The applicant sought treatment for depression and anxiety. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant genuinely intended to stay temporarily in Australia for the purpose for which the visa was granted, as stipulated by clause 602.215 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the applicant's failure to satisfy the requirements of clause 602.215. Specifically, the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of ongoing medical treatment or a defined period of stay for such treatment. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered the applicant's extensive history of visa applications, reviews, ministerial intervention requests, and court appeals, which indicated a strong desire to remain in Australia. This history, coupled with the absence of evidence to counter the implication of a desire to remain permanently, led the Tribunal to conclude that the applicant did not genuinely intend to stay temporarily. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant did not meet the criteria for exemption under clause 602.212(6) as he was under 50 years of age.

Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the requirements for the grant of the Medical Treatment visa. The decision under review, which refused the visa, was affirmed.