SHRESTHA (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa, Subclass 602, by an applicant seeking to act as a support person for his daughter. The applicant's daughter, born in Australia, had significant medical issues stemming from premature birth, including chronic lung disease and sensitivity to illnesses. The applicant sought to remain in Australia to provide emotional and other support to his daughter, who was undergoing medical treatment.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the requirements of clause 602.212 of the Migration Regulations 1994, specifically as a "support person" under subclause (4). This required the applicant to demonstrate that he sought to support an applicant in relation to whom certain medical treatment visa requirements were met, that the person to whom support was to be provided held a relevant visa, and that the applicant satisfied public interest criterion 4005.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's daughter's medical condition and her long-term residence in Australia. While the applicant's daughter had significant medical needs, the Tribunal noted that the applicant's own visa history and the circumstances of his wife's visa applications did not meet the specific criteria for the applicant to be granted a Subclass 602 visa as a support person. The Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements of clause 602.212(4).

Despite affirming the decision not to grant the visa, the Tribunal considered the applicant's circumstances, particularly his daughter's age, her medical condition, and her length of residence in Australia. In light of these factors and the ministerial guidelines concerning discretionary powers, the Tribunal referred the case to the Department for consideration by the Minister, along with the applications of the applicant's daughter and wife.