Thajali (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a Medical Treatment (Visitor) (Class UB) visa, Subclass 602. The applicant sought to remain in Australia temporarily for medical treatment. 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.

The Tribunal's assessment focused on whether the applicant met the criteria outlined in clause 602.215, which requires consideration of the applicant's compliance with previous visa conditions, their intention to comply with the conditions of the proposed visa, and any other relevant matters. Crucially, this requirement does not apply if the applicant meets the specific criteria in clause 602.212(6), which relate to being medically unfit to depart Australia due to a permanent or deteriorating condition, having applied for a permanent visa, and being over 50 years of age. The Tribunal found that the applicant, aged 42, did not meet the criteria in clause 602.212(6) as they were not over 50 and there was no evidence of medical unfitness to depart.

Consequently, the Tribunal applied clause 602.215 and considered the applicant's history. The applicant had been in Australia since January 2009, had applied for and been refused permanent visas, and had unsuccessfully appealed a refusal of a previous visa to the Federal Court. No medical information or evidence of treatment had been provided, and the proposed treatment period had passed. The Tribunal concluded that, based on these cumulative findings, the applicant did not genuinely intend to stay temporarily for the purpose of the visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant the Subclass 602 visa.