Tern (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a decision concerning an applicant for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence of adequate health insurance during their intended period of stay in Australia, as required by the visa regulations.

The Tribunal was tasked with determining whether the applicant satisfied clause 500.215 of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994, which mandates that an applicant provide evidence of adequate health insurance arrangements in Australia for the duration of their intended stay. This requirement is further reinforced by condition 8501 attached to student visas, obliging holders to maintain such insurance while in Australia. The definition of "adequate arrangements for health insurance" under regulation 1.03 allows for coverage meeting specified requirements in a legislative instrument or, in the absence of such specifications, arrangements adequate in the circumstances.

The Tribunal noted that there was no legislative instrument under regulation 1.15L specifying health insurance requirements for particular visa classes or persons. However, departmental policy (PAM3) indicates that the requirement can be met through Overseas Student Health Cover (OSHC), an approved national health scheme, Defence or Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade sponsorship, or an Endeavour Award, with exemptions for students from countries with specific agreements with Australia. In this instance, the applicant had departed Australia and provided no evidence to satisfy the health insurance criteria.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not met the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 500 (Student) visa. As the applicant did not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa.