Judicial review of migration decisions

Yes, you can apply for a judicial review yourself. However, the process can be complex and involves understanding legal principles and procedures. It’s strongly advised to seek the assistance of a migration lawyer who is experienced in judicial review matters. They can help you identify if your case has strong grounds for review, navigate the legal system, prepare the necessary documentation, and represent you in court.

If the judicial review is unsuccessful, the original decision of the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) or the Minister remains in effect. In some cases, you may have the option to appeal the judicial review decision to a higher court, such as the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia or the Federal Court of Australia, if there is a question of law that warrants further consideration. It’s important to discuss these options with your lawyer, as this involves additional processes and time limits.

The duration of the judicial review process can vary depending on several factors, including the complexity of the case, the workload of the court, and whether there are any delays in the proceedings. Generally, it can take several months to over a year from the filing of the application to the final decision. Your migration lawyer can provide a more specific timeline based on your individual case and the current court schedules.

The possible outcomes of a judicial review include:

1. Affirmation: The court may affirm the decision of the ART or Minister, meaning the original decision stands.
2. Variation: The court can vary the decision, altering some aspects of it.
3. Setting Aside: The court can set aside the decision, effectively nullifying it. This may lead to the matter being remitted back to the original decision-maker for reconsideration.‍
4. Remission: The court can remit the case back to the ART or original decision-maker with specific directions for reconsideration. It's important to note that the court does not make a new decision on the merits of the case but focuses on the legality of the decision-making process.