Your ART hearing: what happens on the day, what to lodge before it, who to call, what you will be asked, and the mistakes that lose a hearing you should have won

MARN 1576536

The hearing notice and the response form

The Tribunal lists the hearing by a written notice, sent to the applicant and the representative, giving the date, the time, whether it is by video or in person, and the Member's identity in some cases, with a response form that must be returned by the date in the notice: whether the applicant will attend, whether an interpreter is needed and in which language and dialect, the names and relationship of any witnesses and whether they will attend in person or by phone, and any request to change the date with the reason. The form matters more than it looks. An applicant who does not return it, or does not attend, can have the matter decided on the papers without them, which for a matter that turns on credibility is a matter lost; a change of date is granted for a genuine reason put early, a medical appointment, a witness overseas, and refused for one put the week before. The notice also sets the date by which further evidence should be lodged, and the review guide covers what was lodged with the application and what remains.

What the Member has read before you walk in

The Member has the Department's file in full, which includes the original application and every document in it, the Department's notes, the decision record with its reasons, and often earlier applications by the applicant and the family, together with everything lodged at the Tribunal: the application for review, the statements, the submission, the new documents. The Member has read it, has noted where two accounts differ, where a date in one document does not match a date in another, where a period is unexplained, and where the evidence is thin, and the hearing is largely the Member asking about those places. An applicant who has not read their own file, and many have not read the original application their previous agent lodged, is asked about a document they do not remember and answers from memory something the document contradicts; the first preparation for any hearing is to obtain the file, which the representative does, and to read it with the applicant line by line, so that nothing the Member asks about is a surprise.

The statement and the submission

Two documents do most of the work. The applicant's written statement, signed and dated, sets out the facts in the applicant's own words in order: in a partner matter the history of the relationship from meeting to today, in a student matter the study history and the reasons, in a sponsorship matter the position and the work, in a cancellation matter what happened and what has changed, addressing in particular each reason the Department gave for the refusal, with the documents that support each part referred to by name. The representative's submission is a different document: it sets out the legal criteria the Tribunal must apply, identifies what the Department found not met, and argues from the evidence, the statement and the documents, that each criterion is met, citing the regulation, the direction or the policy where it helps. Both are lodged before the hearing, as early as the notice allows, so that the Member reads them before forming a view; a statement lodged the day before, or handed up at the hearing, is read in a hurry or not at all. At the hearing the applicant adopts the statement as their evidence, confirming that it is true, and is questioned on it, so it must be the applicant's own account, read and understood by the applicant, in detail they can repeat; a statement drafted by someone else in language the applicant would not use, containing facts the applicant cannot recall, is the hearing's first problem.

Witnesses, and who should not be one

A witness is a person who knows a fact that matters from their own knowledge and can say so under questioning: the Australian partner, who is expected to give evidence in every partner matter and whose account is compared to the applicant's on every detail; the employer or the manager, in a sponsorship matter, on the position and the work; a parent, a sibling or a child, in a cancellation matter, on the hardship to the family; a treating doctor or a counsellor where health or rehabilitation is in issue; a friend who has seen the couple together over years and can describe what they saw. Each gives a short written statement before the hearing, lodged with the applicant's, and at the hearing adopts it and answers the Member's questions on it. The witness who should not be called is the one whose knowledge is second-hand, who will say what they think helps rather than what they know, who has not read the statement they are adopting, or whose account differs from the applicant's in a detail, the date of the first meeting, the address, who paid for what; the Member's questions find the difference, and a contradiction between the applicant and their own witness on a small fact does more harm than no witness at all. Witnesses are prepared by being told what the hearing is and how it runs, and by reading their own statement; they are not told what to say, and a witness who has been coached sounds coached.

The interpreter

An applicant who is not fully comfortable giving detailed evidence in English under questioning, about dates, money, feelings and intentions, asks for an interpreter on the response form, in the language and the dialect, and the Tribunal provides an accredited interpreter at no cost; the request does not count against the applicant, and an applicant whose English is good enough for daily life but who answers a Member's precise question with an imprecise answer because the word was not there is read as evasive, which does. With an interpreter the applicant speaks in their own language, in short sentences, pausing for the interpretation, and does not switch to English for the parts they think they can manage, because the record then has two voices; a witness who needs an interpreter asks for one too. An applicant who is comfortable in English gives evidence in English, and an interpreter is not a shield against hard questions, only a means of understanding them.

The room, by video or in person

Most migration hearings are now by video, with the Member in the Tribunal's room and the applicant, the representative and the witnesses connecting from wherever the notice permits, which may be the representative's office; some are in person at the Tribunal's registry. The hearing is recorded and is private, with the public excluded in the ordinary case. The Member opens by confirming who is present, explaining that the Tribunal decides the matter afresh on the evidence before it, identifying the issues, and confirming the documents on file; the applicant is affirmed or sworn and questioned; the representative may ask the applicant questions and then makes the submission orally, briefly, where the written submission has already been lodged; witnesses are called one at a time, having waited outside, and questioned; and the Member closes with the decision or with an indication of when it will be given. By video, the applicant tests the connection the day before, sits in a quiet room with no one else present unless the Member has allowed it, keeps the documents in front of them, and does not read answers from a screen, which the Member sees. The hearing runs an hour to three, and longer in a complex matter with several witnesses.

What you will be asked

The questions are the refusal's reasons, turned into questions, together with everything in the file that does not fit. In a partner matter: how and when you met, how the relationship developed and when it became exclusive, when you began living together and where, how money is arranged and who pays what, who knows about the relationship and how they came to know, the periods apart and how you stayed in contact, the plans for the future, and anything the Department doubted, an age difference, a short courtship, a previous relationship, a sponsor's history; the partner refusal guide sets out the four pillars the questions follow. In a student matter: the course and the provider, why Australia and why this course after the last one, the attendance and the progress and what explains any failure, the finances, and what the applicant intends to do after. In a skilled or sponsorship matter: the position and its duties, the business and its need, the salary, the experience claimed and the documents that show it. In a cancellation matter: what happened, why, what has changed since, the ties to Australia, the hardship to the applicant and the family, and the risk of it happening again, under the direction the Member applies where character is in issue. The Member also asks about every inconsistency: a date given differently in two places, a document that says one thing and a statement another, a period unexplained. The answer to each is the truth, said plainly, with the reason where there is one; an applicant who does not know says so, and an applicant who does not remember says that, and neither is held against them in the way a guessed answer is.

Adverse information and the invitation to comment

The Act requires the Tribunal to put to the applicant any information before it that would be a reason, or part of a reason, for an unfavourable decision, where the applicant did not provide it for the review, and to invite the applicant to comment on it: an earlier application in which the applicant said something different, a departmental record of a conversation, a document from a third party, a finding in another matter, a social media page. The information is put either in writing before the hearing, with a period to respond, or orally at the hearing, and the applicant's comment is part of the evidence. The applicant who has read the file knows what will be put, has the explanation ready and gives it calmly: the earlier application was prepared by an agent and signed without reading, the date was a mistake, the circumstances changed, with the document that shows it. The applicant who hears it for the first time at the hearing, and reacts with surprise or anger or a denial that the document itself contradicts, has lost the point and often the hearing. Where adverse information is put in writing before the day, the response is drafted with the representative and lodged by the date, and it is as important as the statement.

The decision, and when it comes

Some decisions are given at the end of the hearing, orally, with written reasons to follow, where the Member is satisfied on the evidence that the criterion is met; most are reserved, and the written decision with reasons arrives weeks to months later, longer where the Member's list is heavy. A favourable decision remits the matter to the Department with a direction that the relevant criterion is met, and the Department then completes the assessment of the remaining criteria, health and character where not yet done, and grants the visa, or in a cancellation matter the cancellation is set aside and the visa continues; an applicant on a bridging visa remains on it until then. An unfavourable decision affirms the Department's decision, and the applicant's remaining routes are judicial review in the Federal Circuit and Family Court for a legal error in the Tribunal's decision, within a short period, which does not reconsider the facts, and a request for ministerial intervention, which is discretionary and rare; the Tribunal guide covers both. The Tribunal's fee is refunded in part where the decision is favourable, on the Tribunal's rules.

The mistakes that lose a winnable hearing

• Not reading the file. The Member has; an applicant surprised by their own earlier application has no answer to it.
• A rehearsed answer. Answers memorised as a script sound like one, and a Member who hears the same phrase from the applicant and the witness hears coaching.
• A witness who contradicts the statement. On the date you met, on where you lived, on who paid; small, and fatal to credibility.
• Documents handed up on the day. Unread, unweighed, and a sign that the case was not ready.
• Guessing. An applicant who does not remember a date and guesses one that the document contradicts has given false evidence; "I don't remember" is an answer.
• Arguing with the Member. The Member's questions are not accusations; an applicant who treats them as such answers the wrong thing.
• Not attending. A matter decided on the papers without the applicant is decided on the Department's reasons.
• Leaving the preparation to the week before. The statement, the submission and the witnesses' statements take weeks to do properly and are read by the Member before the day.

The hearing checklist

1. Return the response form by its date, with the interpreter request and the witness list.
2. Obtain the Department's file and read it with your representative, line by line, noting every inconsistency the Member will ask about.
3. Write your statement in your own words, addressing each reason for the refusal, with the documents named; lodge it and the submission as early as the notice allows.
4. Choose witnesses who know the facts themselves, have them write short statements, and make sure no detail differs from yours.
5. Prepare the explanation for every piece of adverse information, with the document that supports it.
6. On the day: attend, test the connection, answer the question asked, say "I don't remember" when you do not, and let the written submission do the arguing.

Book a consultation — $330 inc. GST, credited

General information only, current at October 2026; not advice on your own case. The Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024, Part 5 of the Migration Act 1958 including the provisions on hearings, the giving of adverse information and the invitation to comment, and the Tribunal’s practice directions and guidelines for the Migration and Refugee Division, as in force at the date above; the Tribunal’s procedures and listing practices vary by registry and by Member. Outcomes depend on the Tribunal’s assessment of each matter; no registered migration agent can guarantee a result (Code of Conduct, Migration Agents Regulations). Keshab Chapagain, MARN 1576536.