The federal government has proposed new reforms that will change the way migration decisions are reviewed, impacting students, employers, and migrants across Australia.
The Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 was introduced to the Senate on 3 November 2025, which will make migration appeal decisions – in relation to certain kinds of applications – entirely on written submissions, impacting the ability for thousands of visa applicants to have their cases heard.
Attorney-General, the Honourable Michelle Rowland, said: “These proposed procedures are an important step towards improving the efficiency of the tribunal, and supporting timely decision making for applicants.”
BDO migration services leader Rebecca Thomson (pictured) said that while the changes intend to speed up the decision-making process and clear backlogs, they risk removing “an important safeguard” for applicants.
Thomson stressed that under the new laws, applicants could “no longer have a general right to appear before the tribunal and explain their situation face to face”.
She said the changes may come at a “real cost” to fairness and will impact individuals whose cases rely on “credibility, personal circumstances or clear explanation”.
BDO said the laws will also replace the common law right to be heard in person.
Written submissions ‘decisive’
Many applicants may not speak English and come from backgrounds where written advocacy may not be the norm, Thomson noted.
The introduction of a fixed list of written steps set out in the legislation is a major shift for people seeking to challenge a migration refusal, she added.
In the past, an applicant’s ability to speak directly to the reviewer has been the “only practical way” to tell the court important facts about their lives, BDO said.
“That is a significant change in a system that has always recognised the need to hear from the people affected by decisions,” Thomson said.
The reforms will make the quality of written applications decisive in appeal outcomes.
The tribunal will also be granted the powers to dismiss the application if the information does not respond to a written request for information within a stated timeline. There will be no extension of time, and reinstatement is not guaranteed.
“HR teams should understand the heightened risk of losing key talent due to technical or avoidable errors in tribunal reviews,” Thomson said.
“If an employee is critical to your business, timely and expert assistance is no longer optional. Supporting sponsored workers to engage a migration lawyer early can make the difference between retaining and losing capability.”
“Many employers already use repayment or clawback arrangements for immigration support, and similar mechanisms can apply to tribunal representation. Investing in a strong written case protects both the individual and your workforce continuity.”
Carlos Tse is a graduate journalist writing for Accountants Daily, HR Leader, Lawyers Weekly.
