Commencing judicial review of a Commonwealth administrative decision
Judicial review examines the legality of a decision, not its merits. Grounds include jurisdictional error, denial of procedural fairness, improper purpose, unreasonableness, and failure to consider a mandatory consideration. The remedy is a writ returning the matter for reconsideration.
This is an 8-step workflow for commencing judicial review of a Commonwealth administrative decision under the ADJR Act 1977 (Cth), s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), or s 75(v) of the Constitution.
Before you start
- Decision under review identified
- Statement of reasons (s 13 ADJR) or s 28 AAT Act
- Client standing (person aggrieved)
- Within time or strong case for extension
The workflow
Identify the statutory pathway
Identify whether the decision is reviewable under the ADJR Act, s 39B Judiciary Act, s 75(v) Constitution, or a specific privative clause (e.g. Migration Act Part 8). Pathway affects grounds and remedies.
Calendar the time limit
ADJR is 28 days from receipt of reasons or decision; s 39B is no fixed limit but delay affects discretion. Migration decisions have specific statutory limits.
Obtain the statement of reasons
Request a s 13 ADJR statement if not provided. Statement must contain findings on material questions, reference to evidence, and reasons. Defects can ground an error.
Identify reviewable grounds
Map the decision against the s 5 ADJR grounds — breach of natural justice, procedural unfairness, relevant/irrelevant considerations, improper purpose, no evidence, unreasonableness.
Draft the originating application
Draft the Originating Application for Review with grounds particularised. Attach the decision and statement of reasons. Plead specific, not generic, errors.
File and serve
File in the Federal Court (most ADJR) or FCFCOA (migration). Serve the decision-maker and the Attorney-General where constitutional writs are sought.
Manage discovery and evidence
Judicial review is usually determined on the decision-maker's record. Limited additional evidence may be admitted to establish jurisdictional facts or denial of natural justice.
Run the hearing and pursue remedy
Hearing is usually on written submissions and short oral argument. Remedies include certiorari (quash), mandamus (compel), prohibition, and declaratory relief.
What you will have at the end
Either the decision quashed and remitted for fresh consideration, a declaration of invalidity, or a careful refinement of the record for appeal.
Common issues
- Pleading merits complaints dressed as legal errors
- Missing the 28-day ADJR window without grounds for extension
- Over-broad grounds that dilute the strongest arguments
- Failing to serve the Attorney-General on constitutional writs
- Bringing ADJR where a privative clause forecloses review
Run this workflow on a real matter
Quillio maps administrative decisions to s 5 ADJR grounds and drafts originating applications with jurisdictional error argued with precision. See /practice-areas/litigation-lawyers.
This workflow is a general guide. State administrative decisions are reviewed under state legislation — NSW JR Act 1999 has distinct provisions.
Try this workflow with Quillio.
Quillio can run this workflow on a real matter, with citations to current AU authority on every step. The free trial requires no credit card.
Start your free trial