Head to head · Checked 30 October 2026
Merits review at the Tribunal vs Judicial review in the court
They answer different questions. The Administrative Review Tribunal asks whether the decision was correct, re-decides the case on the merits with new evidence allowed, and can grant what the Department refused; it is the first and usually the only review for a refusal that carries review rights, lodged within the period in the notice, commonly 28 days. The Federal Circuit and Family Court asks only whether the Tribunal’s decision was lawful, on jurisdictional error, with no new evidence and no re-deciding of facts, within 35 days of the Tribunal’s decision, and a win sends the case back to the Tribunal rather than granting the visa. Judicial review is the step after a lost merits review, for the case where the Tribunal got the law or the process wrong, and it is a lawyer’s work.
By Keshab Chapagain, registered migration agent (MARN 1576536) since 2015 · WIDEN, Sydney · Reviewed 30 October 2026
Keshab Chapagain · MARN 1576536 · Registered since 2015 - Question
- Was the decision correct? · Was the decision lawful?
- Who decides
- A Tribunal member · A judge of the Federal Circuit and Family Court, then the Federal Court on appeal
- Evidence
- New evidence allowed; a fresh hearing · No new evidence; the Tribunal’s record only
- Deadline
- The period in the refusal notice, commonly 28 days; shorter in detention and for character decisions · 35 days from the Tribunal’s decision, extendable only in limited cases
The migration agent that other migration agents learn from. WIDEN is an OMARA-approved CPD provider — our training is rated ★4.8 by 40+ registered migration agents.
About the CPD →Side by side
| Merits review at the Tribunal | Judicial review in the court | |
|---|---|---|
| Question | Was the decision correct? | Was the decision lawful? |
| Who decides | A Tribunal member | A judge of the Federal Circuit and Family Court, then the Federal Court on appeal |
| Evidence | New evidence allowed; a fresh hearing | No new evidence; the Tribunal’s record only |
| Deadline | The period in the refusal notice, commonly 28 days; shorter in detention and for character decisions | 35 days from the Tribunal’s decision, extendable only in limited cases |
| Outcome | Affirm, vary, set aside and substitute, or remit | Set aside and remit to the Tribunal for a lawful decision, or dismiss |
| Cost | The Tribunal’s application fee, partly refunded on success | Court filing fees, the lawyer, and costs if you lose |
| Status meanwhile | A bridging visa continues for an onshore applicant | A bridging visa must be applied for; the earlier one ends about 35 days after the Tribunal’s decision |
| Watch out | Missing the period ends the option | A judicial review is not a second merits review; weak cases cost money and time |
Charges are the current government application charges (from 1 July 2026, main applicant) — see the fee calculator for your family's total. Checked 30 October 2026.
The honest verdict
They answer different questions. The Administrative Review Tribunal asks whether the decision was correct, re-decides the case on the merits with new evidence allowed, and can grant what the Department refused; it is the first and usually the only review for a refusal that carries review rights, lodged within the period in the notice, commonly 28 days. The Federal Circuit and Family Court asks only whether the Tribunal’s decision was lawful, on jurisdictional error, with no new evidence and no re-deciding of facts, within 35 days of the Tribunal’s decision, and a win sends the case back to the Tribunal rather than granting the visa. Judicial review is the step after a lost merits review, for the case where the Tribunal got the law or the process wrong, and it is a lawyer’s work.
Which side of that line you fall on depends on facts a table cannot hold — your age, score, occupation's lists, and what evidence you can actually assemble. That is consultation territory, not guesswork territory.
More head-to-heads: 482 vs 494 · 190 vs 491 · 189 vs 190 · 482 vs 186
General information only, not migration advice. Settings shown are the general rules; exemptions and stream variations exist. Migration advice is provided by Keshab Chapagain (MARN 1576536) after a paid consultation under the Migration Agents Code of Conduct.
Book 30 minutes with Keshab.
Keshab Chapagain, registered migration agent (MARN 1576536), reads your situation with you and tells you which route fits, what it costs and what happens next.
Video consultation. A$330 inc. GST for 30 minutes, credited in full if you go ahead. Free questions are closed: advice on your own case is the consultation.
Book a consultation — A$330 inc. GST, credited In writing, no call — A$550
Need 60 minutes, or bringing a partner, employer or documents to go through? Extended consultation, A$550 inc. GST.
MARN 1576536 · practising since 2015 · contact details
Not sure which visa fits you?
Answer three questions. An automated guide points you to the route that usually applies. General information only.
Questions we get asked first
Merits review at the Tribunal or Judicial review in the court — which is better?
They answer different questions. The Administrative Review Tribunal asks whether the decision was correct, re-decides the case on the merits with new evidence allowed, and can grant what the Department refused; it is the first and usually the only review for a refusal that carries review rights, lodged within the period in the notice, commonly 28 days. The Federal Circuit and Family Court asks only whether the Tribunal’s decision was lawful, on jurisdictional error, with no new evidence and no re-deciding of facts, within 35 days of the Tribunal’s decision, and a win sends the case back to the Tribunal rather than granting the visa. Judicial review is the step after a lost merits review, for the case where the Tribunal got the law or the process wrong, and it is a lawyer’s work.
What is the main difference between the Merits review at the Tribunal and the Judicial review in the court?
Question: Merits review at the Tribunal — Was the decision correct?; Judicial review in the court — Was the decision lawful?. Who decides: Merits review at the Tribunal — A Tribunal member; Judicial review in the court — A judge of the Federal Circuit and Family Court, then the Federal Court on appeal. Evidence: Merits review at the Tribunal — New evidence allowed; a fresh hearing; Judicial review in the court — No new evidence; the Tribunal’s record only.
Keep reading