What is the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART)?
The Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) is the federal tribunal that conducts independent merits review of a wide range of decisions made by Australian Government agencies, departments, and ministers. It commenced on 14 October 2024 under the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth), replacing the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The ART describes its purpose as fair, accessible, and independent review, and it inherited the AAT's caseload and much of its case law on transition. For practitioners, the practical point is continuity of principle with a new name, a new governing Act, and some procedural change.
What decisions does the ART review?
The ART reviews Commonwealth decisions across areas including immigration and citizenship, Centrelink and child support, the NDIS, taxation, veterans' entitlements, and workers compensation. Merits review means the Tribunal stands in the shoes of the original decision maker and decides what the correct or preferable decision is on the material before it, rather than only checking for legal error. Within the Comcare scheme, the ART's jurisdiction is set by section 64 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) and by section 54 of the ART Act.
Who does the ART apply to in the Comcare scheme?
For workers compensation, the ART reviews Comcare and self-insured licensee decisions, but only at the second tier. The SRC Act runs a three-tier process: a determination, then a reconsideration that produces a reviewable decision, then external review by the ART. The Tribunal cannot review a first-tier determination directly, and it cannot exercise powers that were not available to the decision maker at the reconsideration stage. An application for ART review is generally made within 60 days of receiving the reviewable decision, with limited scope to apply for an extension.
Where does AI fit in ART casework?
ART decisions are a primary source. Practitioners increasingly use AI tools to summarise outcomes, draft submissions, and surface relevant authorities. The risk is fabricated or distorted case citations. Large language models can invent case names, party names, and tribunal references that look plausible but do not exist, or attach the wrong ratio to a real case. Any citation produced by an AI tool must be verified against the published decision before it is relied on. Treat AI output as a draft to be checked, not a source of truth.
What should practitioners do when preparing an ART matter?
Confirm whether a matter has passed through determination and reconsideration before assuming the ART has jurisdiction, because incomplete internal review can defeat an application. Track the 60-day window from the date the reviewable decision is received. When using AI to research or draft, verify every case reference against legislation.gov.au, AustLII, or the Tribunal record, and de-identify claim material before pasting it into any tool. Where AI assists drafting, keep a human reviewer accountable for the final document and the accuracy of every authority cited.
Bottom line
The Administrative Review Tribunal is the Commonwealth body that reviews government decisions on their merits, deciding the correct or preferable outcome rather than only testing whether the original decision was lawful. For workers compensation practitioners it is the external step that follows reconsideration, so a matter has to clear internal review before the Tribunal has anything to decide. The risks in practice are procedural rather than conceptual: letting the application window pass, or relying on an authority an AI tool produced without checking it against the published decision. Treat Tribunal decisions as primary sources to be verified, and keep a named human accountable for every citation that reaches a submission.
TheAICommand. Intelligence, At Your Command.