# SRC Act review readiness check - TheAICommand artefact

Name: SRC Act review readiness check
Date: 2026-08-15
Source: https://theaicommand.com/library/artefacts/what-to-check-before-seeking-review-of-a-determination
Article: https://theaicommand.com/workers-comp/art-review-rights
Licence: Free to use and adapt internally. Attribution appreciated. No warranty. Educational purposes only.
Disclaimer: General information and education only. Not legal, compliance, financial, or professional advice.

---

### Section 1: the three review tiers

| Tier | Forum | Clock | What the reviewer can do |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Internal reconsideration (s 62 SRC Act) | Request should generally be made within 30 days of the determination being notified | Affirm, vary, or revoke the primary determination. Produces a reviewable decision |
| 2 | Administrative Review Tribunal (s 64 SRC Act) | Application must generally be made within 60 days of the reviewable decision being received | Affirm, vary, set aside and substitute, or set aside and remit with directions. Some limits on substitution |
| 3 | Federal Court appeal (s 44 ART Act 2024) | Appeal must be lodged within 28 days of the ART decision | Dismiss, set aside, or remit. Does not generally substitute its own decision on the merits |

Extensions are available in limited circumstances at each tier and should not be relied upon.

Reconsideration is the gateway. ART review of a primary determination requires a reconsideration first; going straight from a primary determination to the ART is procedurally not available.

Section 62 requires the reconsideration to be carried out by a reconsideration officer who was not involved in making the primary determination. That is a procedural fairness requirement, not a courtesy.

A Federal Court appeal is on a question of law, not a fresh merits review. Errors in the application of legal tests, misconstructions of statutory provisions, denials of natural justice, and failures to provide adequate reasons can all ground a question of law. Disagreements about the weight given to evidence generally cannot.

### Section 2: the five-step assessment

**Step 1. Read the determination and the reasoning behind it.**

Record: is the reasoning clear on the contested evidence?

A clearly reasoned determination on contested evidence is harder to displace than a poorly reasoned determination on similar facts.

**Step 2. Identify the specific element in dispute.**

Record: which element, and which provision?

Liability under section 14, calculation of NWE under section 8, arranging rehabilitation assessments or examinations under section 36, or the rehabilitation pathway. The review tier and the available outcomes depend on the element.

**Step 3. Assess the evidence base.**

Record: what evidence sat behind the determination, what has changed, and what was missed.

A reconsideration request that brings new material evidence is materially stronger than a request that re-argues the same evidence.

**Step 4. Consider the AI-evidence dimension.**

Record: was AI part of the original determination, and was its role documented?

Where the AI role was documented and human accountability was clear, the AI evidence is unlikely to be the path to a different outcome. Where it was not, that is potentially a procedural fairness issue worth raising.

**Step 5. Mind the clock.**

Record: which clock applies, when it started, and the date it expires.

Thirty days for reconsideration. Sixty days for lodgement of ART review. Twenty-eight days for a Federal Court appeal.

### Section 3: what to never do

- Skip the reconsideration step in an attempt to go straight to the ART. It is procedurally not available for review of primary determinations.
- Lodge an ART application without an evidence pack that addresses the original determination's reasoning.
- Allow the ART hearing to be the first time the AI role in the determination is mentioned.
- Misstate the timeframes. The statutory timeframes are firm, and being a few days late is fatal in the absence of extension.

### Section 4: governance checklist

- Reconsideration officers have been trained on AI-evidence considerations
- An evidence pack template exists for matters heading to the ART that includes the AI role where relevant
- Scheme submissions to the ART explicitly address the explainability of AI-influenced determinations where the issue arises
- ART outcomes are tracked against initial determinations to surface systematic issues
- Practice direction updates from the ART are reviewed quarterly for any AI-relevant changes