Handbook of ART Legal Procedure
Chapter 1: Starting a review
Current as at 28 August 2025
e
WA ART under FOI
RNING
This work is protected by copyright.
You may download, print and reproduce this
material in unaltered form only (retaining this
by th
notice) for your personal, non-commercial use or
educational use within your organisation.
Apart from any use as permitted under the
Copyright Act 1968 all other rights are reserved.
© Commonwealth of Australia
on 28 August 2025
Released
link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 16 link to page 17
CHAPTER 1: STARTING A REVIEW
1 Jurisdiction
1.1 Jurisdictional areas
1.2 What is a ‘reviewable decision’?
1.2.1 Intelligence and security
1.2.2 Second review of ART social security decisions
1.2.3 Migration Act Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
FOI
1.2.4 Character
2 Requirements for a valid review application
2.1 Who may apply?
under
2.1.1 Generally
2.1.2 NDIS
2.1.3 Part 5 (Migration and P
ART 2025
rotection)
2.1.4 Character
2.2 When to apply?
the
2.2.1 Generally by
August
2.2.2 Part 5 (Migratio 28
n and Protection)
2.2.3 Character
2.3 How to app on
ly?
2.3.1 Generally
Released
2.3.2 Social security and NDIS
2.3.3 Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
2.3.3 Character
2.4 Fees
2.4.1 Generally
2.4.2 Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
2.5 What if review application not properly made?
1
link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 18 link to page 18 link to page 18 link to page 19 link to page 19 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 22 link to page 22 link to page 23 link to page 23 link to page 23 link to page 23
2.5.1 Generally
2.5.2 Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
3 After an application is made
3.1 Provision of information by decision-maker
3.1.1 Generally
3.1.2 Intelligence and Security
3.1.3 Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
3.1.4 Character
FOI
3.2 Effect of application for review on decision
3.2.1 Generally
3.2.2 Part 5 (Migration and Protection) review under
s
3.3 Requesting a review be expedited
3.3.1 Generally
3.3.2 Part 5 (Migration and P
ART 2025
rotection)
3.3.3 Character
Relevant amending legislation
the
Table 1 – Part 5 Migration by
Act decision August
s – Time limits / Standing / Location
requirements
Time limits
28
Standing/ locatio on
n requirements
Released
2
link to page 4 link to page 4
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
1 Jurisdiction1
1.1 Jurisdictional areas
Section 196 of the
Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) (the Act) establishes the
eight jurisdictional areas of the Tribunal which are set out below. Under s 196(2) of the Act,
the President may establish one or more lists as subareas within a jurisdictional area. Specific
details of the cases falling within each list are set out in the
Administrative Review Tribunal
(Establishment of Lists) Instrument No. 1 of 2024.2
• General Jurisdictional Area (JA)
FOI
o
Child Support List
o
Information and Other List
• Veterans and Workers’ Compensation JA
under
o
Veterans List
o
Workers’ Compensation List
ART 2025
• Taxation and Business JA
o
Taxation List
the
o
Regulatio
by
n and Discipline Li
nce SchemAugust
st
• National Disability Insura
28 e (NDIS) JA
o
Plans List
o
Access Liston
• Social Security JA
Released
o
Centrelink List
o
Paid Parental Leave List
• Migration JA
o
Study, Visitor and Other Visas List
1 Unless otherwise specified, all references to legislation in this chapter are to the
Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth)
(the Act) and the
Administrative Review Tribunal Rules 2024 (Cth) (the Rules) currently in force, and all references and hyperlinks
to commentaries are to materials prepared by Legal Services.
2 Schedule – Table of Lists to the
Administrative Review Tribunal (Establishment of Lists) Instrument No.1 of 2024.
3
link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
o
Family and Partner Visas List
o
Working, Skilled and Investment Visas List
o
Character, Citizenship and Bridging Visas List
• Protection JA
o
China List
o
India List
o
Malaysia List
FOI
o
Vietnam List
o
Africa, Americas, Middle East and South Asia under
Countries List
o
All Other Countries List
• Intelligence and Security JA
Section 5(1) of the Act states that the appli
contain
ART
cation of a provision 2025
of the ART Act is subject to a
contrary intention in another Act.
Subsection 5(2) states that if an Act provides that an
instrument made under that Act can
the provisions thatapply in additionto,orinsteadof,
or contrary to the provisions in the ART Act, the application of a provision of the ART Act is
subject to a contrary intention in the instrument
.3
1.2 What is a ‘reviewa
by
ble decision’?
The Tribunal has no general review pow
August
Act or 28
ers – it may only review those decisions in relation to
which it has been given jurisdiction. Section 12(1) of the Act provides that a decision is a
‘reviewable decision’ if anon alegislativeinstrumen
t4providesforanapplication to be
made to the Tribunal for review of the decision
.5 This means that other Acts and legislative
instruments – not the Act – determine the Tribunal’s jurisdiction
.6 Section 12(2) of the Act
makes clear that decisions purportedly made by individuals who do not have authority to make
Released
those decisions are reviewable
.7
1.2.1 Intelligence and security
An ‘intelligence and security decision’ is defined in the Act as:
3 Cf. s 25(6)
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) (Act No. 91 of 1975) (AAT Act) (repealed by item 1, sch 17 to the
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (Cth) (Act No.38, 2024) (‘C&T No.1
Act).
4 Note that the use of the term “Act or legislative instrument” rather than “enactment” has the effect of excluding notifiable
instruments from providing for applications for review, which is a change from the AAT Act: Revised Explanatory Memorandum,
to the Administrative Review Bill 2024 (‘the Revised EM’), p 39.
5 This is similar to previous s 25 AAT Act.
6 Revised EM , p 39.
7 Cf. s 25(3A) AAT Act; see also the Revised EM, p 39.
4
link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 6
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
• a criminal intelligence assessment; or
• an exempt security record decision; or
• a foreign acquisitions and takeovers decision; or
• a security assessment; or
• a security clearance decision; or
• a security clearance suitability assessment
.8
If the Tribunal has reviewed an intelligence and security decision (other t
FOI
han an exempt
security record decision)
,9 the person who applied for the review may apply to the Tribunal for
the decision to be reviewed agai
n.10 However, the Tribunal must dismiss the application unless
satisfied that:
• further evidence of material significance has becom under
e available; and
• the further evidence was not available at the time of the initial review
.11
1.2.2 Second review of ART social securi
Section 131D of the Act allows a person w ART
ty decisions
2025
aside and the
hose interests are affected by an ART social
services decision to apply to the Tribunal for review of the decision (second review). An ‘ART
social services decision’ is defined to mean: for an ‘eligible social services decision’ that has
been affirmed, varied, set
by remad
t define August
e, set aside and remitted, the decision as affirmed,
varied, remade, or set aside; or for an ‘eligible social services decision’ made under sections
92 or 95N(2) of the
Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth), the decision
as made
.12 Section 131C of the Ac 28 s an‘eligible socialservices decision’as:
• a reviewable decision made under the
A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act
1999;
• reviewable decisi on
on made under the
A New Tax System (Family Assistance)
Released
(Administration) Act 1999 , other than a child care provider decision (within the
meaning of that Act);
• a decision under section 92 of the
Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988
to refuse an extension application;
• a reviewable decision made under the
Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act
1988 that is a care percentage decision (within the meaning of that Act);
8 s 4, .
9 As defined in s 4.
10 s 140(1) and (2).
11 s 140(3).
12 s 131D(3).
5
link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
• a decision under s 95N(2) of the
Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988
to make, or not to make, a determination;
• a reviewable decision made under the
Paid Parental Leave Act 2010 that is a claimant
decision (within the meaning of that Act);
• a reviewable decision made under the
Social Security Act 1991;
• a reviewable decision made under the
Social Security (Administration) Act 1999;
• a reviewable decision made under the
Student Assistance Act 1973.
1.2.3 Migration Act Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
FOI
Sections 338 and 338A of the
Migration Act 1958 (Migration Act) set out the types of decisions
which are ‘reviewable migration decisions’ and ‘revi under
ewable protection decisions’
(respectively)
.13 The Minister may issue a conclusive certificate preventing review of a decision
that would otherwise be reviewable if the Minister believes that it would be contrary to the
national interest to change the decision or for the decision to be reviewed
.14
1.2.4 Character
Section 500 of the Migration Act sets out ’char ART
2025
the acter’decisions which may bereviewedby the
Tribunal. They include decisions by a delegate of the Minister to refuse a visa under s 501(1)
,15
to cancel a visa under s 501(2), or not to revoke a mandatory visa cancellation under
s 501CA(4).
16
by August
28
on
Released
13 s 338 is substantially the same as the provision which was in force prior to the commencement of the ART (AAT) and s 338A
is substantially the same as repealed s 411 Migration Act except that the carve out for “fast track decisions” has been removed.
14 See s 338(1)(a); 338A(2)(a), 339 Migration Act.
15 This can include protection visa refusals under s 501(1):
MICMSMA v BFW20; BGS20 v MICMSMA [2020] FCAFC 121 at [8],
[120], [121], [160] and
KDSP v MICMSMA [2020] FCAFC 108 at [104] per Bromberg J and at [302] per O’Callaghan and
Steward JJ. An application for special leave to appeal to the High Court was dismissed in
KDSP v MICMSMA [2021] HCATrans
20; Note that these subsections are substantially the same as those which were in force prior to the commencement of the
ART.
16 s 500(1)(b), (ba). Mandatory visa cancellation decisions by delegates under s 501(3A) are not reviewable: s 500(4A).
Character-based visa decisions under s 501 are not reviewable under Part 5 Migration Act: s 500(4)(b); see p
9 Visa cancellation
and refusal on character grounds commentary.
6
link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 23
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
2 Requirements for a valid review application
2.1 Who may apply?
2.1.1 Generally
A ‘per
son17 whose interests are affected by a reviewable decision
’18 may apply to the Tribunal
for review of the decision
.19 This does not apply in relation to an intellige
FOI
nce and security
decision (other than an exempt security record decision)
;20 the persons who may apply for
review of intelligence and security decisions are specified in the Acts under which the
decisions are made
.21
An organisation or association of persons, whether incorporated or not, is taken to be a person
whose interests are affected by a decision if the decision rel under
ates to a matter included in the
objects or purposes of the organisation or association at the time the decision is made and
the matter has not been removed from the objects or purposes of the organisation or
associatio
n.22
2.1.2 NDIS
A person directly affected by a decision, or a
ART
person on their be 2025
half, may apply for review of,
or reasons for, an NDIS decision
.23
2.1.3 Part 5 (Migration and Prote the
by
ction)
Section 347A of the Migration Act sets out
on deci August
who can apply for review of reviewable migration
decisions and reviewable protecti
mation r
28
sions and whether they needed to be physically
present in the migration zone when the decision was made and when the application for review
is mad
e.24 See
Table 1 – Part 5 Migration Act Time limits / Standing / Location requirements
for further detailed infor on egarding standing and location requirements for review
applications in relation to different types of migration and protection decisions.
Released
17 s 17(2) provides that this includes the Commonwealth or an authority, tribunal or other body (whether incorporated or not)
that is established by an Act or instrument made under an Act.
18 Or for second reviews of certain social services decisions, a person whose interests are affected by an ‘ART social services
decision’: s 131D .
19 s 17(1); this is equivalent to s 27(1) AAT Act; see s 35 of the Act for applications made on behalf of another person; Note that
s 131H provides that an application for second review in relation to a claimant decision (within the meaning of the
Paid Parental
Leave Act 2010 (Cth) may not be made by a person in the person’s capacity as an employer); Note that a person may appeal a
decision of the Tribunal that the person’s interests are not affected by a reviewable decision to the Federal Court: s 173.
Sections 17(1) and 173 do not apply in relation to applications for review of reviewable migration or review protection decisions
:s 347A Migration Act which specifies who can apply for review of these types of decisions.
20 As defined in s 4.
21 See note to s 138(2).
22 s 15; This does not apply to Migration and Protection reviews under Part 5 of the Migration Act and most visa cancellation
decisions under s 500 of the Migration Act: ss 347A(1); 500(1), (2), (3) Migration Act.
23 ss 103(1A) and (1B)
National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth)
.
24 These provisions are substantially the same as the provisions which were in force prior to the commencement of the ART.
7
link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 23 link to page 23
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
2.1.4 Character
For character refusal and cancellation decisions made under s 501 and refusal decisions
under s 65 of the Migration Act relying on ss 5H(2), 36(1C), 36(2C)(a) or (b), only a person
who would be entitled to seek review of the decision by application under Part 5 of the
Migration Act if the decision had been made on another ground may apply for review of the
decision
.25 For visa cancellations, it is generally the person whose visa was cancelled who
has standing, and the person must be in the migration zone at the time of the cancellation
decision. For visa refusals, the rules are more complicated, but in most cases for visas applied
for onshore, the visa applicant has standing, while for offshore visas requiring FOI
sponsorship,
the sponsor has standin
g.26
An Australian citizen or a person who is a lawful non-citizen whose continued presence in
Australia is not subject to any limitation as to time imposed by law may make an application
for review of a decision to deport a non-citizen under s 200 because the non-citizen has been
in Australia for less than 10 years and is convicted of crim
under
es as set out in s 201 (apart from a
decision where the Minister has personally issued a certificate to exclude that person from
being able to review that decision in the national interest under s 502 of the Migration Act)
.27
The general provisions in the Act allowing an orART
ganisatio
n28 who 2025
se interests are affected by a
reviewable decision to apply for review and determining the parties to a proceedi
ng29 apply to
applications for review of a decision made under 500(1)(ba) (ie. decisions not to revoke a
decision to cancel a visa of a person serving a sentence of imprisonment made under s
501CA(4) of the Migration Act)
.30
2.2 When to apply?
the
2.2.1 Generally
by August
Time periods
28
An application to the Tri on
bunal for review of a decision must be made within the period
prescribed by the
Administrative Review Tribunal Rules 2024 (Cth) (ART Rules)
.31
Released
The ART Rules set out the following general timeframes:
25 s 500(3) Migration Act, which refers to s 500(1)(b) and (c) Migration Act; see
Table 1 – Part 5 Migration Act Time limits /
Standing / Location requirements.
26 s 338 and s 347A Migration Act; These provision are substantially the same as the provisions which was in force prior to the
commencement of the ART; see p 1
0 Visa cancellation and refusal on character grounds commentary.
27 s 500(2) Migration Act.
28 s 15.
29 s 22.
30 Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum, to the
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions
No. 1) Bill (which became Act No.38 of 2024 (UP104))), [85] and [86].
31 s 18 Act; this is equivalent to s 29(2) and (3) AAT Act; see s 131J(1) Act for second reviews of certain social security decisions;
however note circumstances in which an application for a second review of a child care decision (within the meaning of the
A
New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) may be made outside this time.
8
link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
•
decisions where notice is given in writing – the period starts on the day the decision
under review is made and ends on the day that is 28 days after the day the applicant
is given the notice/ statement of reasons (unless a statement of reasons is requested
and not provided or is inadequate)
.32
•
decisions not to do something which are taken to have been made by s 16 of the
Act – the period starts on the day the decision under review is taken to be made and
ends on the day that is 28 days after the day the decision under review is taken to be
made (unless a decision is subsequently made)
.33
However, the legislation under which a reviewable decision is made may spe FOI
cify a different
period for applying for review of that type of decision
.34
If an application for review of a decision is not required by law to be made within any particular
period, then the application must be made within a ‘reasonable time’ after the making of the
decision. If the Tribunal considers that the application was notunder
made within a reasonable time
after the making of the decision, it must dismiss the application unless special circumstances
justify the Tribunal reviewing the decision
.35
Extension of time
An applicant may apply to the Tribunal to ext ART
end the period dur 2025
ing which the applicant may
apply to the Tribunal for a review of a decision (extension of time application) unless a
provision of the Rules or an Act or i
plication the
nstrument under which the Tribunal has powers to review
the decision provides otherwise
.36
If an extension of time ap by is m
son notif August
ade, the Tribunal may give notice, or require the
applicant to give notice, of the application to any other person the Tribunal considers is
affected by the applicatio
n.37 A per
he period28 ied of an extension of time application may notify
the Tribunal within 14 days that the person wishes to oppose the application
.38 If a party
notifies the Tribunal that they wish to oppose the extension of time application, then the
Tribunal must not extend t on unless ithasgiventheapplicantand any personopposing
the application a reasonable opportunity to adduce evidence and make submissions to the
Tribunal in relation to the extension
.39
Released
The Tribunal may, by order, extend the period for applying for review if the Tribunal considers
that it is reasonable in all the circumstances to do so
.40 Note that the Tribunal does not have
the power to extend the period if the applicant is permitted to apply for a reinstatement of the
32 r 5 ART Rules; note that this is similar to previous s 27A AAT Act.
33 r 6 ART Rules.
34 Note to s 18(1) Act, and s 5 Act For example, see s 347 of the Migration Act.
35 s 20; see subsection (3) for matters the Tribunal must have regard to in considering whether the application was made within
a ‘reasonable time’; note that this is similar to s 29(4)-(6) AAT Act.
36 s 19(1); this is equivalent to s 29(7), (8), (9) and (10) AAT Act; see [3.12]
Administrative Review Tribunal (Common Procedures)
Practice Direction 2024 (Cth) Common Procedures Practice Direction for method of application; note that the Tribunal cannot
extend the time for filing an application seeking review of an application by an employer for first review of a parental leave decision,
a migration decision, a protection decision or an expedited character decision.
37 s 19(5).
38 s 19(6).
39 s 19(7).
40 s 19(2).
9
link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
application under s 102 or if the Tribunal has already refused an application for
reinstatement
.41
Calculating time
Generally, when calculating time for these purposes the relevant period does not include the
day on which the calculation is said to begin
.42
If the last day of the time period within which the applicant can lodge an application to the
Tribunal falls on a Saturday, a Sunday or a holiday, the applicant has until the FOI
end of the next
day that is not a Saturday, a Sunday or a holiday to lodge his or her applicatio
n.43 The term
‘holiday’ is defined for these purposes to mean either a day that is a public holiday in the place
in which the application is lodged, or a day on which the office where the application is lodged
is closed for the whole day (for example, the public service holiday between Christmas and
New Year)
.44 Public holidays differ between Australian States and Territories. Further, the
public service holiday between Christmas and New Year is under
not a gazetted ‘public holiday’
under the relevant legislation (or a Saturday or Sunday). However, as a result of amendments
to s 36 of the
Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) (Acts Interpretation Act), which commenced
on 27 December 2011, it falls within the second definition of ‘holiday’
.45
2.2.2 Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
Section 347(3) of the Migration Act sets out the ART
2025
time for making a review application (including
providing any prescribed informatio the
n or documents – see
How to apply - Migration Protection
and Character) of a Part 5 decision as follows:
• if the applicant is in by
immigration de
ns mad August
tention on the day the applicant is notified of the
decision –
-
for review applicatio
appli
28 e onorafter21February2025–within 14day
s46
after the day the applicant is notified of the decision; or
-
for review on cations made before21February 2025,wherethedelegate’s
decision record is dated on or after 14 October 202
447 – within seven working
da
ys48 after the day the applicant is notified of the decision; or
Released
41 s 19(4). .
42 Item 6 s 36(1)
Acts Interpretation Act (Cth), as it applies from 27 December 2011.
43 s 36(2)
Acts Interpretation Act (Cth), as applies from 27 December 2011.
44 s 36(3)
Acts Interpretation Act (Cth), as applies from 27 December 2011.
45 Acts Interpretation Act s 36(3), as applies from 27 December 2011.
46 s 347(3)(a) as amended by item 115, Part 2 of Schedule 2 to the
Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures)
Act 2025 (Cth) (Act No. 14 of 2025).
47 For decisions made before 14 October 2024, please contact Legal Services.
48 Section 13 of Part 4 of the
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1 Rules 2024 (Cth)
(F2024L01292). Section 13 of Part 4 of F2024L01292 was repealed by item 1 of Schedule 1 to the
Administrative Review Tribunal
(Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Amendment Rules 2025 (Cth) (F2025L00138) with effect from 21 February
2025.
10
link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 9 link to page 12 link to page 23
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
• otherwise, where the delegate’s decision record is dated on or after 14 October 202
449
– within 28 days after the day the applicant is notified of the decision
.50
Any prescribed fee for a review application must be paid as follows:
• for reviewable migration decisions – within the period specified for making the
application (see above); or
• for reviewable protection decisions – within the prescribed period (which may end after
the review of the decision
).51
The Tribunal has no power to extend the period during which the applicant m FOI
ay apply to the
Tribunal for review of a decision made under Part 5 of the Migration Act
.52
2.2.3 Character
For character decisions made under ss 501 and 501CA(4) for under
persons who are in the migration
zone at the time the reviewable decision was made (expedited character reviews)
,53 the review
application must be made within nine days following the receipt of a decision to cancel, refuse
or not to revoke the cancellation of a visa. Thi
ART
s time cannot be e2025
xtended by the Tribunal
.54 If
the applicant is outside the migration zone, see
2.2.1 Generally above.
If the Tribunal considers that an application for review has been filed outside of this period, it
will seek submissions on the issue,
nce wit the
either in writing or at a Tribunal case event to determine
whether it can hear the application. The Minister must provide evidence which establishes the
date on which the applicant was notified of the decision and whether the applicant was
properly notified in accorda by h the r August
equirements of s 501G of the Migration Act. The
Minister is expected to be represented at any case event the Tribunal convenes for these
purpo
ses.55
If the Tribunal finds, or the Minist
y notified, 28
er accepts prior to the Tribunal making a decision, that the
applicant was not properl on the representative of the Minister must advise the Tribunal
of the re-notification on the same day on the day the re-notification occurs and must provide
a copy of the re-notification and all accompanying documents and the relevant time limits will
Released
49 For decisions made before 14 October 2024, please contact Legal Services.
50 s 347(2) Migration Act; the timeframes are substantially different from the timeframes which were in force prior to 14 October
2024 ; se
e Table 1 – Part 5 Migration Act Time limits / Standing / Location requirements. 51 s 347(3) Migration Act; reg 4.31(B)(2) provides that the fee is payable 7 days after the day the applicant is, in accordance with
section 379C of the Migration Act, taken to have received a copy of the written statement made under subsection 368(1) of the
Migration Act in respect of the Tribunal’s decision.
52 s 347(5) Migration Act; [2.12]
Administrative Review Tribunal (Migration, Protection and Character) Practice Direction 2024 (Cth) (Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction).
53 This does not include the review of a character decision made under section 501 to cancel or refuse to grant a visa of a person
who is outside of the migration zone at the time of the decision or a decision to refuse a protection visa relying on sections 36(1C)
or 36(2C) of the Migration Act: [5.2] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction
54 s 500(6B) Migration Act; [5.4](a) Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction; This provision is substantively the
same as the provision which was in force prior to the commencement of the ART.
55 [5.5] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction
11
link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 13
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
commence from the date of the re-notification
.56 If an applicant is re-notified, the applicant
must file a new application if the applicant wishes that decision to be reviewed
.57
2.3 How to apply?
2.3.1 Generally
An application to the Tribunal may be made in writing or in any other manner specified for the
application in the practice direction
s.58 Part 3 of the
Administrative Review TribuFOI
nal (Common
Procedures) Practice Direction 2024 (Cth) (Common Procedures Practice Direction) sets out
how to apply for a review. An application for review of a decision, other than a Migration or
Protection decision, may be made by:
(a) completing and submitting the electronic application form accessible from the Tribunal
website;
(b) downloading and completing the paper form accessibl under
e from the Tribunal website and:
i)
posting or otherwise delivering it to a registry of the Tribunal;
ii) emailing it to the Tribunal at a
ART
specified email ad 2025
dress; or
(c) letter, that includes certain details (set out below) and a copy of the decision sought
to be reviewed (if available):
i)
posted or otherwise the
by deli
ned in an August
vered to a registry of the Tribunal;
ii) emailing it to the Tribunal at a specified email addr
ess.59
The details which must be contai
28 y of theways set outformakinganapplication are:
(a) the applicant’s name;
(b) contact details of on
an applicant or their representative;
(c) the nature of the decision sought to be reviewed;
Released
(d) the date of the decision;
(e) the date the applicant received the decision; and
(f) the reasons why the applicant says the decision should be reviewed
.60
56 [5.6] and [5.7] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction
57 [5.8] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction
58 s 34(1) cf. s 29(1)(a), (c), (ca) and (cb) AAT Act. This provision provides greater flexibility to the Tribunal to set the application
requirements and process for different classes of applications: Revised Explanatory Memorandum, Act No.40 of 2024, p 52.
59 [3.2] Common Procedures Practice Direction.
60 [3.3] Common Procedures Practice Direction; this does not apply to Migration and Protection reviews.
12
link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
Failure to include the above information will not invalidate an application, but may affect its
progress
.61 Where the Tribunal requires further information from a party to progress an
application for review, the Tribunal may request the party to provide that information in
writing
.62
2.3.2 Social security and NDIS
For review of social security decisions and decisions made by the National Disability Insurance
Agency, an application may also be made by telephoning the registry and provi FOI
ding the above
information to staff of the Tribunal
.63
An application for a second review of an ART social services decision must be made in the
same manner as an application for a first review of an eligible social security decision
.64
2.3.3 Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
An application for review of a Migration, Protection or Charactunder
er decision may be made using
the same methods as set out above
,65 except that the prescribed information and documents
which must be provided with the application are set out in the
Migration Regulations 1994
(Cth) (Migration Regulations). The Migration R ART
egulations provide 2025
that if the person making an
application for review of a reviewable migration decision (review applicant) has a copy of the
notification of that decision (decision notification) – the prescribed document is a copy of that
decision notification. If the person
s full na the
does not have a copy of the decision notification, the
prescribed information is:
• the review applicant’ by me; August
and
• the review applicant’s address and contact details; and
• the date of the decision (if 28
known to the review applicant), and a description of the
decision; and
• at least one of the on
following:
- the review applicant’s date of birth;
Released
- the review applicant’s country of birth;
- the review applicant’s citizenship or nationality (or in applications for review of
reviewable protection decisions – a statement that the person is stateless);
61 [3.4] Common Procedures Practice Direction.
62 [3.5] Common Procedures Practice Direction.
63 [3.6] Common Procedures Practice Direction; this is similar to previous ss 29(1)(a)(ii) and 29AA AAT Act.
64 [3.9] Common Procedures Practice Direction.
65 [2.3] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction.
13
link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 15
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
-
the country of issue and number of the review applicant’s passport
.66
If a representative lodges an application for review on behalf of an applicant, the
representative must give the Tribunal separate contact details for the applicant as well as
contact details for the representati
ve.67
2.3.3 Character
For expedited character reviews, if a decision under s 501 or decision under s 501CA(4)
Migration Act, not to revoke a decision to cancel a visa relates to person in m FOI
igration zone,
the application to the ART for review of decision must be accompanied by:
-
the document notifying the person of the decision in accordance with s 501G(1)
and
-
one of the sets of documents given to the per under
son under s 501G(2) at the time
of the notification of the decision
.68
Section 500(6CB) Migration Act provides that a failure to comply with subsection (6C) does
not affect the validity of the application.
2.4 Fees
ART 2025
2.4.1 Generally
the
Division 2 of Part 5 of the A by
RT Rules sets
s 123 of August
out the fees payable for applications to the Tribunal
(including applications referred to the guidance and appeals panel under s 122 of the Act and
applications to the President under
for cert 28 the Act). These Rules do not apply to reviewable
migration and protection decisions under the Migration Act
.69 Rule 22 of the ART Rules sets
out the standard application fee, a lower application fee for small business taxation decisions,
a lower application fee on ain other taxation decisions and a fee in concessional
circumstances (set out at s 29(1) of the ART Rules). Rule 29 of the ART Rules sets out the
following concessional circumstances:
Released
• the applicant has been granted legal aid for the matter to which the fee relates under
a legal aid scheme or service;
• the applicant is the holder of a Commonwealth concession card;
70
66 Reg 4.12A(2) and (3) Migration Regulations for applications for review of reviewable migration decisions – see (4) where the
review applicant does not have a copy of the notification and the review applicant is not an individual and (5) where the application
for review relates to an application for a visa made by a person (visa applicant) who is not the review applicant); Reg 4.31
Migration Regulations for applications for review of reviewable protection decisions.
67 [3.5] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction.
68 S 500(6C) Migration Act.
69 r 20 and 21 ART Rules.
70 The ‘holder’ does not include dependants: rule 29(2) ART Rules.
14
link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 16
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
• the applicant is serving a sentence of imprisonment, is otherwise detained in a public
institution or is in immigration detention;
• the applicant is younger than 18;
• the applicant is receiving youth allowance or Austudy payments under the
Social
Security Act 1991 (Cth) or benefits under the ABSTUDY scheme;
• the Principal Registrar makes an order that, having regard to the applicant’s income,
expenses, liabilities and assets, the Principal Registrar considers that t
FOI
he payment of
an amount would cause, or has caused, financial hardship to the applicant
.71
Rule 33 sets out how the fees will be increased each year
.72
Applications for fee reductions may be made through an online application or using a form
available on the Tribunal websit
e.73 Rule 30 sets out the decisiunder
ons for which an application fee
is not payable, including social security decisions, child support decisions and NDIS
decision
s.74 The Principal Registrar may order that only one fee is payable for multiple
applications in certain circumstan
ces.75 The circumstances in which a person is entitled to a
refund are set out at Rule 32 of the ART Rules.
Rule 34 provides that a person may apply to t
e 30. Ther ART
he Tribunal for revi 2025
ew of a Principal Registrar’s
decision in relation to financial hardship under paragraph 28(1)(f) and a decision not to order
that only one fee is payable under rul the e is nofeeformakingthis typeofapplication
.76
2.4.2 Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
Regulation 4.13 sets out the by
fee for an appli
me as the
August
cation for a reviewable migration decision and the
circumstances in which no fee is payable
.77 The circumstances in which a Registrar can
reduce the fee by 50% are the sa
Direction 28 circumstances in which a Principal Registrar can
make an order regarding eligibility for concessional fees where payment of the standard fee
would cause financial hardshi
p.78 The
Administrative Review Tribunal (Migration, Protection
and Character) Practice
received prior to the expir on
2024 (Cth) (Migration, Protection and Character Practice
Direction) provides that if an applicant for the review of a migration decision is seeking a fee
reduction, at least 50% of the prescribed fee and request for reduction of the fee must be
Released y oftheperiodformaking theapplicatio
n.79
Regulation 4.31B sets out the fee for an application for review by the ART of a reviewable
protection decision and provides that the fee is payable within seven days after the day the
71 There is a similar test for reviewable migration decisions by which the Principal Registrar may reduce the prescribed fee to
50% of the prescribed amount: reg 4.13(4) Migration Regulations.
72 See reg 4.13A Migration Regulations for review of reviewable migration decisions.
73 [3.8] Common Procedures Practice Direction; [2.5] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction for Migration reviews.
74 This is equivalent to reg 22 of the
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Regulation 2015 (Cth).
75 r 31 ART Rules.
76 R 30, Item 1, ART Rules.
77 The circumstances in which no fee is payable are the same as under the previous AAT.
78 Reg 4.13(4) Migration Regulations; see r 28(1)(f) ART Rules.
79 [2.6] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction.
15
link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
applicant for the review is taken to have been notified of an oral decision or taken to have
received a copy of the Tribunal’s statement of reasons.
2.5 What if review application not properly made?
2.5.1 Generally
Section 97 of the Act provides that the Tribunal must dismiss an application if the Tribunal is
satisfied that the decision is not reviewable by the Tribunal.
Section 98 of the Act provides that the Tribunal may dismiss an application if a f FOI
ee payable by
the applicant to the Tribunal in respect of the application is not paid by the time prescribed in
the ART Rules. Rule 24 provides that if an application is not accompanied by the prescribed
fee, the Tribunal is not required to deal with the application unless, and until, the fee is paid
and that, for the purposes of s 98 Act, the time by which the f under
ee must be paid is the end of the
6 weeks starting on the day the application is made.
2.5.2 Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
Section 348(3) of the Migration Act provides ART
that the Tribun 2025
al only has power to review
applications which are ‘properly made’ in accordance with ss 347 and 347A of the Migration
Act. An application for review of a Migration or Protection decision is ‘properly made’ if, and
only if, the application is made withi
cation for the
n the period specified in that Act, any information and any
documents prescribed under that Act are provided within the period specified in that
subsection and for an appli by a revi
plication August
ewable migration decision – any prescribed fee is
paid within the period specified for making the application.
If the Tribunal considers that an ap
s and not 28 does not meet the requirements for lodging a valid
application, the Tribunal may invite the person making the application to make submissions
as to why the application is valid. The Tribunal will make a decision on the validity of the
application on the paper on ify the person who made the application in writing of the
decision
.80
The dismissal powers in ss 97 (Tribunal must dismiss application if decision is not reviewable
Released
decision) and 98 (Tribunal may dismiss application if fee is not paid) of the Act
(see 2.5.1
Generally above) do not apply to a review of a migration or protection decision
.81
80 [2.4] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction.
81 s 336P(2)(i)(ia) and (ib) of the Migration Act as inserted by item 114 of Part 12 of Schedule 2 to Act No. 14 of 2025.
16
link to page 18 link to page 18 link to page 18 link to page 18 link to page 18 link to page 18 link to page 18
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
3 After an application is made
3.1 Provision of information by decision-maker
3.1.1 Generally
Within 28 days after the Tribunal notifies a decision-maker of a decision the subject of an
application for review, the decision-maker must give the Tribunal a statement
FOI
of reasons for
the decision and a copy of every other document that is relevant to the Tribunal’s review of
the decision which is in the possession or under the control of the decision-maker
.82 This does
not apply to certain decisions made under the Migration Ac
t83 or to an application for review
of a reviewable objection decision
.84
Where a decision-maker has given the Tribunal a statemenunder
t of reasons, the Tribunal may
order the decision-maker to give the Tribunal, within the period specified in the order, a
statement containing further information in relation to findings on material questions of fact in
relation to the decision, evidence or other material on which the findings were based and/or
reasons for the decision
.85 At any time during the Tribunal’s review of a decision:
• if a document that is relevant to the r
the decisi ART
eview comes into t 2025
he possession or under the
control of the decision-maker and the document has not been given to the Tribunal for
the purposes of the review – the on maker must give a copy of the document to
the Tribunal within 28 days after the day on which the document came into the
possession or under the control of the decision-maker
;86
• if the Tribunal is
by
satisfied that a do
sion-m August
cument (either a particular document or documents
in a class of documents) that may be relevant to the review is in the possession or
under the control of the deci
quired to 28
aker – the Tribunal may request the decision-maker
to give a copy of the document to the Tribunal within a specified period
.87
If a decision-maker is re
on give the Tribunal a statement or copy of a document within
a period, the decision-maker must give a copy of the statement or document to each other
party to the proceeding for review of the decision within the same period
.88
Released
The Common Procedures Practice Direction sets out the form in which the documents which
are required to be given to the Tribunal by a decision-maker on commencement of a review
82 s 23 Act; this is equivalent to s 37(1) AAT Act.
83 S 336P(2)(d) for Part 5 Migration Act reviewable decisions and s 500(6D) Migration Act for decisions made under s 501 or
s 501CA(4).
84 See s 14ZZF
Taxation Administrative Act 1953; note there may be other exclusions eg. s 165-25
Australian Charities and Not-
for-Profits Commission Act 2012.
85 s 24 Act; this is equivalent to s 38 AAT Act.
86 s 25 Act; this is equivalent to s 38AA AAT Act except that now the timeframe is set as 28 days rather than “as soon as
practicable”.
87 s 26 Act; this is equivalent to s 37(2) AAT Act.
88 s 27 Act; this is equivalent to ss 37(1AE) and 38AA(2) AAT Act, with some substantive changes to expand the requirements of
the provisions so that the parties to the proceeding have access to all the same information as the Tribunal and the decision-
maker: Revised Explanatory Memorandum to the ART Bill , p 47-8.
17
link to page 19 link to page 19 link to page 19 link to page 19 link to page 19 link to page 19
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
must be given (i.e. they must be in a text-searchable PDF, organised chronologically, indexed
and paginated)
.89
A party to the proceeding for the review may apply to the Tribunal to shorten the period within
which the decision-maker must give the statement or document and the Tribunal may, by
order, shorten the period if it appears to the Tribunal that a party to the proceeding could suffer
hardship if the period is not shortened. A decision-maker may apply to the Tribunal to extend
the period within which the decision-maker must give the statement or document (even if it
has expired)
.90 The decision-maker does not need to give the statement or document to the
Tribunal if the Tribunal orders the decision-maker not to or in circumstances FOI
specified in the
practice directio
ns91 or where the Tribunal is considering an application for an order under s 70
prohibiting or restricting the publication or other disclosure of information in the statement or
copy
.92
3.1.2 Intelligence and Security
Section 141 of the Act provides that a relevant agency head under
must give to the Tribunal certain
information and documents (depending on the type of decision and whether or not a non-
disclosure certificate has been issued in relation to certain information) within 28 days after
the agency head is given notice of the appli
tter to whi ART
cation, or within such f 2025
urther period as the Tribunal
allows. The Tribunal must not, at any time, permit an applicant to have access to any copy or
particulars of a notice (without redaction) given under s 79B(1) of the
Foreign Acquisitions and
Takeovers Act 1975 (Cth) or any ma
eral of the ch the notice (without redaction) rel
ates.93
For security clearance decisions or security clearance suitability assessments, s 143 of the
Act allows the Director-Genby SecuritAugust
y to give the Tribunal a copy of certain relevant
standards. If disclosed, the Tribunal must do all things necessary to ensure that any copies of
relevant standards are not disclosed to the applicant or any other person (except those listed
in s 144(1) of the Act).
3.1.3 Part 5 (Migration and P
28
on
rotection)
Under s 352(2) of the Migration Act, the Secretary must, within 10 working days of being
notified of an application for review, forward a copy of the delegate's decision to the Tribunal
.94
Released
In addition, under s 352(4), the Secretary must, as soon as practicable after being notified of
the application, give to the Tribunal each other document, or part of a document, that is in the
Secretary's possession or control and is considered by the Secretary to be relevant to the
review of the decision. Except in extreme cases where the document is so critical that not
providing it means the Tribunal could not discharge its review obligation, it is for the Secretary
89 [4.2] Common Procedures Practice Direction.
90 s 28(3)-(7) Act; this is equivalent to ss 37(1AA) and (1A) and aspects of s 27(1) AAT Act, with some substantive changes
including an additional exception from the obligation to provide materials if the Tribunal so orders, or in circumstances determined
by the practice directions: Revised Explanatory Memorandum, Act No.40 of 2024, p 48.
91 s 28(8) and (9) Act.
92 s 29 Act.
93 s 141(4) Act.
94 s 352(2) Migration Act, reg 4.16. If the application is for review of a decision covered by s 338(4) (certain bridging visa
decisions), the Secretary must comply with the requirements within 2 days after being notified: s 352(3).
18
link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20 link to page 20
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
to determine a document’s relevance to the review and that generally the objective relevance
of a document is not the test to be applied
.95
3.1.4 Character
Section 503A is designed to protect intelligence about criminals and criminal activity.
Sections 503A(2)(c) and 503A(6) can operate to override the natural justice requirement to
provide information to a person whose visa has been cancelled where that information is
credible, relevant and significant to the Minister’s decision under sections 50
FOI
1 or 501CA
.96
3.2 Effect of application for review on decision
3.2.1 Generally
After an application is made to the Tribunal for review of a r under
eviewable decision, the decision
may not be altered otherwise than by the Tribunal
.97 However, a decision may be altered if the
parties to the proceeding for the review consent to the alternation and the Tribunal by order,
consents to the alteration or the decision is remitted to the decision-maker under s 85
.98 Except
in relation to reviews of decisions made under ART
Part 5 of the Mi 2025
gration Act, the making of an
application to the Tribunal for review of a reviewable decision does not affect the operation of
the decision or prevent the taking of action to implement the decision
.99
A party to a proceeding may apply fo
eration or the
r an order staying or otherwise affecting the operation or
implementation of the decision
.100 Before making, varying or revoking an order staying or
otherwise affecting the op by imple
ake into August
mentation of a reviewable decision, the Tribunal
must give the parties to the proceeding a reasonable opportunity to make submissions to the
Tribunal in relation to the making, varying or revocation of the order (unless it is satisfied that
it is not practicable to do so) and t
28 account the interests of any person who may be
affected by the review of the decision
.101 The Tribunal may make such an order if it considers
it is desirable to do so for the purposes of ensuring the effectiveness of the review
.102
The Tribunal cannot mak
or a taxation decision ex on
e an order staying the operation of a migration decision, a protection
decision
,103 certain social security decisions that are not eligible social services decision
s104
Released cept for a small business taxation assessment decision
.105
95
SZOIN v MIAC (2011) 191 FCR 123 at [54]–[55]. In
WAGP v MIMIA (2006) 151 FCR 413 the Court observed that it would be
a difficult task to demonstrate that the Secretary’s view about the relevance of a particular document was erroneous: at [64]; This
provision has remained substantially same to the provision which was in force prior to the commencement of the ART.
96
Vella v MIBP [2015] FCAFC 53 at [61], [68]. This provision has remained unchanged from that which was in force prior to the
commencement of the ART.
97 s 31(1); this clause is equivalent to s 26 AAT Act.
98 S 31(2).
99 s 32(1); this clause is equivalent to s 41 AAT Act. Section 336P(2)(h) of the Migration Act excludes the operation of s 32 ART
Act from applying to reviews of reviewable migration or reviewable protection decisions.
100 s 32(2); see [4.6] Common Procedures Practice Direction for method of application.
101 s 32(7) and (8).
102 s 32(2).
103 s 336P(2)(h) Migration Act.
104 See 131C; see 1.2.2 Second review of ART social security decisions above.
105 Note to [4.7] Common Procedures Practice Direction.
19
link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 21
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
3.2.2 Part 5 (Migration and Protection) reviews
The Tribunal cannot stay the operation of reviewable migration decisions or reviewable
migration decisions
.106
3.3 Requesting a review be expedited
3.3.1 Generally
A party may request that the Tribunal expedite the review process
.107 If the
FOI
Tribunal receives
a request for a review to be expedited, it will invite any other participating party to the review
to make a submission on the request
.108 The Tribunal will only expedite the review process if
it is satisfied that it is appropriate to do
so109 and will not usually expedite a process unless all
participating parties will be ready to proceed on the date of the hearing and the Tribunal is
satisfied that an expedited review process would not disad
under
vantage any party
.110
3.3.2 Part 5 (Migration and Protection)
The procedures for requesting the Tribunal
ART
expedite the review 2025
process set out above apply
in reviews of Migration or Protection decision
s.111 An applicant may also make a request for
an expedited decision of a migration or protection decision if all of the following requirements
are met:
• the applicant has applied for the
a review of a migration or protection decision to refuse to
grant the visa;
• the visa was refuse by
d on the basis t August
hat the applicant did not meet one or more criteria;
and
• the applicant can provide
a are now 28
documentary evidence that objectively demonstrates the
criterion or criteri
on met
.112
Released
106 S 336P(2)(h) Migration Act;
[3.1(c)] Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction.
107 [4.8] Common Procedures Practice Direction; see [4.9] for method of application. Note that some enactments require the
Tribunal to expedite certain reviews. For example, where Centrelink is continuing to pay benefits pending the review by the
Tribunal.
108 [4.10] Common Procedures Practice Direction.
109 [4.8] Common Procedures Practice Direction.
110 [4.11] Common Procedures Practice Direction.
111 [3.12] of the Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction.
112 [3.13] of the Migration, Protection and Character Practice Direction; see [3.14] for method and required content of the
application; note that previous regs 4.23 (expedited review – close family visit visas), 4.24 (expedited review (decisions to cancel
visas) and 4.27 (expedited review – certain applicants in immigration detention) were repealed by the
Migration Amendment
(Administrative Review Tribunal Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2024 (Cth).
20
link to page 22
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
3.3.3 Character
Where the applicant is in the migration zone, the Tribunal must decide the review within the
period of 84 days after the day on which the person was notified of the decision, otherwise the
decision will be taken to have been affirmed
.113
Relevant amending legislation
Reference
Legislation
Title
number
No. 38, 2024
FOI
Bulletin
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and
Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (Cth)
Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) No. 14, 2025
Act 2025
under
Last updated/reviewed: 11 March 2025
ART 2025
the
by August
28
on
Released
113 s 500(6L)(c). The provision is substantially the same as which was in force prior to the commencement of the ART; see p 56
Visa cancellation and refusal on character grounds commentary.
21
link to page 23 link to page 23 link to page 23 link to page 23
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
Table 1 – Part 5 Migration Act decisions – Time limits / Standing / Location r FOI
equirements
Time limits (all references in the table are to sections in the Migration Act or regulations in the Migration Regulations, unless otherwise specified)
Detention status of applicant
Prescribed period for lodgement
•
for review applications made before 21 February 2025, where the
delegate’s decision record is dated on or after 14 October 202
4114 -
within 7 working day
s115 after the day the applicant is notified of the
Applicant in detention
decision; or under
•
for review applications made on or after 21 February 2025 - within 14
Wh
wit ART
day
s116 after th
ere the delegate’s de 2025
e day the applicant is notified of the decision
cision record is dated on or after 14 October 2024
,117
Applicant NOT in detention
hin 28 days after the day the applicant is notified of the decision.
the
s 347(2)(b)
Standing/ location requirements
by August
Type of decision
28
Standing to apply for review Location of review applicant
non-citizen who is the subject of the
physically present in migration zone
Reviewable protection decision under s 338A(1)
on decision
at time of Tribunal application
s 347A(4)
s 347A(5)
114 For decisions dated before 14 O Released
ctober 2024, please contact Legal Services.
115 s 347(3)(a),
s 13 Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) No. 1 Rules 2024 (Cth) (F2024L01292). Section 13 of Part 4 of F2024L01292 was repealed by item 1
of Schedule 1 to the
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Amendment Rules 2025 (Cth) (F2025L00138) with effect from 21 February 2025.
116 s 347(3)(a) as amended by item 115, Part 2 of Schedule 2 to the
Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Act 2025 (Cth) (Act No. 14 of 2025).
117 For decisions dated before 14 October 2024, please contact Legal Services.
22
link to page 24
Handbook of ART Legal Procedure– Starting a review
Reviewable migration decisions under s 338
s 338(2) decision - onshore visa refusal (except bridging visa resulting in
non-citizen who is the subject of the
physically present in migration zone
detention)
decision
a
s 338(3) decision - onshore visa cancellation (except bridging visa resulting in
FOI
t time of Tribunal application
s 347A(1)(a)
s 347A(2)
detention)
s 338(3A) decision - non revocation of visa cancellation
s 338(4) decision - bridging visa refusal /cancellation in detention
s 338(5) decisio
n118 - offshore sponsored visa refusal
sponsor / nominator
s 347A(1 under
)(b)
s 338(6) decision - offshore former permanent resident visa refusal
no requirement
rele
s 338(7) decision - offshore family visitor visa refusal
physically present in migration zone
non-citizen who is the subject of the
s 338(7A) decision - onshore/offshore permanent visa refusal
at time of primary decision and
decART
vant relative
s 347A(1)(c) 2025
ision
the
Tribunal application
s 347A(1)(a)
s 347A(3)
s 338(8) decision - points assessment
sponsor / nominator
s 347A(1)(b)
by August
no requirement
s 338(9) decision – misc. prescribed decisions
person prescribed in reg 4.02(5)
s 347A(1)(d)
28
on
118 See
Farooq v MIAC [2008] F
Released
MCA 45 (Nicholls FM, 25 January 2008) where the Court declined to adopt an interpretation of s 338(5) which asserted that, because there was an invalid primary 457
application, the visa could not be granted irrespective of where the applicant was located. The applicant argued that as the application was invalid, the visa could not be granted whilst he was in the
migration zone, and was therefore a reviewable decision under s 338(5)(a). The Court, at [35] rejected this interpretation noting that s 338(5) does not deal with, or is not directed to, the validity or
invalidity of a visa application, but rather is plainly directed to the circumstances relating to the grant of the visa.
23
Document Outline
