The Administrative Review Tribunal and Migration Reviews: Proposed Amendments in 2025
The Administrative Review Tribunal (the ART) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 (the Bill) amends both the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) and the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). It was introduced in the House of Representatives on 3 September 2025 and has since progressed to the Senate for consideration.
The Bill builds upon the reforms enacted by the ART Act which replaced the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Its stated purpose is to enhance efficiency and reduce delays in merits review, particularly in high-volume jurisdictions such as migration.
Current Framework
Under the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024, the Tribunal is empowered to review decisions made under Commonwealth legislation, including migration matters. Key provisions include:
- Section 45, ART Act 2024: permits the Tribunal to determine matters “on the papers” without a hearing, provided procedural fairness is observed.
- Sections 265–267, ART Act 2024: require that parties be notified of decisions and reasons.
- Migration Act 1958 (Cth): confers jurisdiction on the Tribunal to review visa refusals and cancellations, subject to statutory limits.
At present, migration reviews often involve oral hearings, particularly where credibility or complex factual disputes arise.
Key Proposed Changes
- Expansion of Paper-Based Decisions
The Bill amends the ART Act to broaden the circumstances in which the Tribunal may decide matters without holding an oral hearing. For migration reviews, this means that the Tribunal could determine applications based solely on written submissions and documentary evidence, provided procedural fairness is maintained.
- Alignment with Migration Act Provisions
Amendments to the Migration Act 1958 clarify that certain visa-related decisions may be reviewed without oral hearings. This is intended to streamline processing of migration cases, which constitute a significant proportion of the Tribunal’s caseload.
- Efficiency and Accessibility Goals
The Attorney-General’s portfolio emphasises that the reforms are designed to ensure matters are resolved “as quickly, and with as little expense, as proper consideration of those matters permits”. The Bill seeks to balance efficiency with fairness, ensuring applicants retain a meaningful opportunity to present their case.
The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee has examined the Bill and recommended refinements to improve operational efficiency. Among its suggestions, are providing the ART with greater flexibility to issue oral reasons where appropriate, rather than being confined to written reasons and ensuring that expanded paper-based decision powers do not compromise applicants’ rights to procedural fairness.
The Bill and Its Effects
- Reduced Opportunity to Present Oral Evidence
Under the ART Act 2024 s 45, the Tribunal may determine matters without a hearing. The Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 proposes to broaden this power. For visa applicants, this means credibility assessments, often central in migration matters, may be made solely on written material, without the applicant’s oral testimony. Applicants with limited literacy or English proficiency may struggle to convey their circumstances adequately in writing, undermining their ability to be heard.
- Constraints on Responding to Tribunal Concerns
In oral hearings, Tribunal members can question applicants directly, clarifying inconsistencies or gaps. Paper‑based decisions remove this interactive element. Applicants may not know which aspects of their case the Tribunal finds problematic until after the decision is issued. Therefore, legal practitioners lose the chance to adapt submissions in real time, limiting their ability to address adverse inferences.
- Procedural Fairness Risks for Vulnerable Applicants
The Migration Act 1958 (Cth) requires that applicants be afforded natural justice. However, paper‑based determinations may compromise this if applicants from refugee or humanitarian backgrounds rely on oral testimony to explain trauma or persecution, which is difficult to capture fully in document. Further, vulnerable applicants may lack access to professional assistance, resulting in incomplete or poorly structured written submissions.
- Heightened Burden on Written Advocacy
For legal practitioners, the reforms shift the balance of advocacy toward written submissions. This creates risks for errors or omissions in documents may carry greater consequences, as there is no oral hearing to correct or supplement the record. Practitioners must anticipate and pre‑empt the ART concerns in writing, a task that requires significant foresight and precision.
- Potential for Increased Judicial Review
If applicants perceive that their right to procedural fairness has been compromised, they may seek judicial review in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia or the Federal Court of Australia. This could actually in turn increase litigation costs and delays, undermining the efficiency gains sought by the Bill. As a result, it may shift disputes from the merits review jurisdiction into judicial review, where remedies are narrower but procedural fairness is scrutinised closely.
The Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 represents a significant procedural shift. By expanding paper‑based determinations in migration reviews, Parliament seeks to address caseload pressures, it could end up compromising applicants’ procedural fairness. While efficiency is enhanced, the absence of oral hearings may limit opportunities for applicants to explain their circumstances directly to a decision‑maker. If enacted, the Bill will require practitioners and applicants to adapt to a more document‑driven process, with careful attention to the preparation of written submissions, ensuring that procedural fairness is preserved while maximising the persuasive force of written material.
