---
title: "Immigration & Migration Law"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law"
type: "practice_area"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A30"
task_count: 35
last_reviewed: "2026-10-10"
---

# Immigration & Migration Law

> Work from the applicant’s verified history and the exact visa or review pathway. Check current criteria, instruments, evidence and time limits; preserve direct instructions and careful treatment of sensitive information.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-10

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

Also covers: Migration law, visa law, refugee and asylum law, migration advice (RMA practice), Skills in Demand visa practice, employer-sponsored migration

## Key facts

- Tasks: 35
- Green: 3, Yellow: 22, Red: 10
- Levels: Green is AI drafts and the lawyer checks; Yellow is lawyer and AI draft together; Red is the lawyer writes and AI may only check, clarify or collect data.

## Principles

- **Treat decision letters as urgent source documents**: Review rights and time limits depend on the decision, notification and applicant circumstances. Read the actual decision and current law; do not rely on a generic AI deadline or assume an extension is available.
- **Prepare evidence without inventing a narrative**: Useful support includes document checklists, translation reconciliation and upload records. Resolve name, date and account differences with the client; never fill an evidential gap with a plausible story.
- **Protect sensitive accounts and identity**: Protection and family-violence material can create serious risks if disclosed. Use only an approved processing arrangement and keep the original account distinct from summaries or translations.

## Checklist

- Open each relied-on authority independently. Confirm its existence, current status, proposition and any quotation or pinpoint reference.
- Confirm each factual assertion with the witness and original record. Preserve the witness’s own knowledge and words, and check the court’s rules for this document.
- Trace every relied-on figure to its source, confirm dates and assumptions, and independently recalculate totals or derived amounts.
- Calculate operative dates independently from the current rule and actual triggering event. Check exceptions and record the verified deadline.
- Check the current court or regulator requirements, prescribed form and attachments for the intended document and filing.
- Review operative clauses in the complete document, including definitions, cross-references, schedules and inconsistencies with the instructions.
- Confirm that the actual tool, feature and processing terms permit use of this information, including access, retention, training and disclosure conditions.
- Obtain and inspect the relevant current official register or search result. Confirm identities, interests and the date and scope of the search.
- Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
- Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Restrictions

- Confirm firm, client and applicable court or professional restrictions before using any AI feature.

## Jurisdiction note

Apply this guidance to the actual matter and jurisdiction. Confirm current requirements before relying on an example.

## Basis

Suggested practical workflows informed by current primary and professional sources. Confirm each source’s jurisdiction and scope.

## Current requirements

Treat decision letters as urgent source documents. Review rights and time limits depend on the decision, notification and applicant circumstances. Read the actual decision and current law; do not rely on a generic AI deadline or assume an extension is available.

## Current requirements

Prepare evidence without inventing a narrative. Useful support includes document checklists, translation reconciliation and upload records. Resolve name, date and account differences with the client; never fill an evidential gap with a plausible story.

## Current requirements

Protect sensitive accounts and identity. Protection and family-violence material can create serious risks if disclosed. Use only an approved processing arrangement and keep the original account distinct from summaries or translations.

Also covers: Migration law, visa law, refugee and asylum law, migration advice (RMA practice), Skills in Demand visa practice, employer-sponsored migration

Immigration and migration law in Australia is a dense, high-stakes regime governing entry, stay, status change, cancellation, and removal under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and its subordinate instruments, administered by the Department of Home Affairs and reviewed by the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART, which replaced the AAT on 14 October 2024), the Federal Circuit and Family Court (FCC), and the Federal Court. The AI risk profile is extreme: the legislative instrument landscape changes frequently without notice; visa subclass conditions are granular and interdependent; errors in advice are non-rectifiable once a visa application is lodged, a time limit expires, or a character cancellation is actioned; and JNE24 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 and Valu v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 95 confirm that AI hallucinations of migration case citations have already produced personal costs orders and conduct referrals against Australian practitioners in this exact jurisdiction.

## Limits on AI assistance

Red lines — never in this area

## Limits on AI assistance

AI must never generate the content of a client's statutory declaration, witness statement, or protection claims statement — these must be the client's own words, verified by the practitioner (NSW Practice Note SC Gen 23, effective 3 February 2025; DPP v Khan [2024] ACTSC 19, where Mossop J found AI-generated character references carry reduced probative value). AI must never be the source of a case citation filed with the FCC, Federal Court, or ART without the lawyer personally verifying the citation on AustLII or Jade.io for existence, correct neutral citation, and whether it supports the stated proposition — JNE24 [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 and Valu [2025] FedCFamC2G 95 confirm that personal costs orders and referral to the NSW Legal Services Commissioner result from this conduct in migration proceedings. AI must never calculate or state a migration time limit (s 477 35-day judicial review period, partner visa secondary application window, bridging visa expiry, s 501 response deadline) as a final figure — the lawyer must calculate from the actual notice and document the calculation in the file. AI must never generate character references for s 501 proceedings or any proceeding where evidentiary character material is filed — AI-generated character evidence constitutes misleading the tribunal or court (DPP v Khan [2024] ACTSC 19). AI must never provide immigration assistance directly to a client (including via chatbot or automated intake) unless supervised in real time by a registered migration agent or Australian legal practitioner — unregistered provision of immigration assistance is a criminal offence under s 280 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), regardless of any disclaimer on the tool. AI must never be the sole source for country-of-origin information used in a protection visa claim or ART submission — fabricated or stale COI destroys client credibility and may result in the client being returned to harm. Client personal data (passport numbers, visa grant numbers, DOBs, character history, biometrics) must not be entered into a public LLM or any AI tool without a signed data processing agreement and prior written client consent — required under OMARA Code of Conduct s 35 (confidentiality), s 53 (document security), OMARA March 2026 AI Guidance, and APP 11. AI must never determine whether a client's bridging visa is in effect or whether the client is lawfully in Australia — this determination must come from VEVO, not AI output. AI must never be used to apply an operative Ministerial Direction under s 499 without the lawyer first confirming which direction is current — Direction 99 (s 501 character) has been revoked and replaced by Direction 110; AI will apply whichever direction it was trained on, which may be several versions out of date. AI must never produce visa subclass or pathway advice based on the pre-December 2024 TSS/MLTSSL/STSOL architecture without the lawyer verifying that the Skills in Demand (SID) visa and Core Skills Occupation List (CSOL) do not govern the matter — reliance on superseded architecture causes nomination failure and can waste non-refundable application fees.

- AI must never generate the content of a client's statutory declaration, witness statement, or protection claims statement — these must be the client's own words, verified by the practitioner (NSW Practice Note SC Gen 23, effective 3 February 2025; DPP v Khan [2024] ACTSC 19, where Mossop J found AI-generated character references carry reduced probative value).
- AI must never be the source of a case citation filed with the FCC, Federal Court, or ART without the lawyer personally verifying the citation on AustLII or Jade.io for existence, correct neutral citation, and whether it supports the stated proposition — JNE24 [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 and Valu [2025] FedCFamC2G 95 confirm that personal costs orders and referral to the NSW Legal Services Commissioner result from this conduct in migration proceedings.
- AI must never calculate or state a migration time limit (s 477 35-day judicial review period, partner visa secondary application window, bridging visa expiry, s 501 response deadline) as a final figure — the lawyer must calculate from the actual notice and document the calculation in the file.
- AI must never generate character references for s 501 proceedings or any proceeding where evidentiary character material is filed — AI-generated character evidence constitutes misleading the tribunal or court (DPP v Khan [2024] ACTSC 19).
- AI must never provide immigration assistance directly to a client (including via chatbot or automated intake) unless supervised in real time by a registered migration agent or Australian legal practitioner — unregistered provision of immigration assistance is a criminal offence under s 280 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), regardless of any disclaimer on the tool.
- AI must never be the sole source for country-of-origin information used in a protection visa claim or ART submission — fabricated or stale COI destroys client credibility and may result in the client being returned to harm.
- Client personal data (passport numbers, visa grant numbers, DOBs, character history, biometrics) must not be entered into a public LLM or any AI tool without a signed data processing agreement and prior written client consent — required under OMARA Code of Conduct s 35 (confidentiality), s 53 (document security), OMARA March 2026 AI Guidance, and APP 11.
- AI must never determine whether a client's bridging visa is in effect or whether the client is lawfully in Australia — this determination must come from VEVO, not AI output.
- AI must never be used to apply an operative Ministerial Direction under s 499 without the lawyer first confirming which direction is current — Direction 99 (s 501 character) has been revoked and replaced by Direction 110; AI will apply whichever direction it was trained on, which may be several versions out of date.
- AI must never produce visa subclass or pathway advice based on the pre-December 2024 TSS/MLTSSL/STSOL architecture without the lawyer verifying that the Skills in Demand (SID) visa and Core Skills Occupation List (CSOL) do not govern the matter — reliance on superseded architecture causes nomination failure and can waste non-refundable application fees.

## Jurisdiction-specific considerations

Australian traps

## Jurisdiction-specific considerations

MARA/OMARA dual-track regulation: Australian immigration advice is regulated by a dual-track system — solicitors under the ASCR and Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW/Vic) or equivalent state legislation, and Registered Migration Agents (RMAs) under OMARA and the Migration Agents Code of Conduct. AI governance obligations apply to both tracks but through different instruments. Solicitors who are not RMAs may not provide migration assistance except as part of their legal practice. OMARA March 2026 AI Guidance: OMARA's published guidance (March 2026) expressly requires (a) prior written client consent before client data is entered into any AI system; (b) advance disclosure to clients that AI tools will be used; (c) the RMA retains full responsibility for accuracy regardless of AI use. Section 35 of the Code of Conduct (confidentiality) and s 53 (document security) are the operative provisions engaged when client data is entered into AI tools. These are regulatory requirements, not best practice. Section 280 Migration Act (unregistered immigration assistance): An AI chatbot or automated tool that provides immigration assistance to the public without real-time registered practitioner supervision may expose the firm to prosecution. This is a criminal offence, not merely a professional conduct issue. Disclaimers on AI tools do not negate criminal liability. ART (not AAT) from 14 October 2024: The Administrative Review Tribunal replaced the AAT on 14 October 2024. All statutory references to AAT jurisdiction in migration submissions filed after this date are wrong. The operative instruments are the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth), the ART Rules 2024 (Cth), and the ART (Migration, Protection and Character) Practice Direction 2024. AI trained before October 2024 will routinely reference the AAT as if it still exists. The ART Common Procedures Practice Direction 2026 (effective March 2026) applies to procedural matters. Section 477 jurisdictional time limit (35 days from ART decision): The 35-day window for judicial review in the FCC is a near-absolute jurisdictional limit — it runs from the date of the ART decision, not the date the decision is received. Extension under s 477(2) is available only in the interests of the administration of justice and is narrowly applied. AI date calculations of this period must never be relied upon. Ministerial Direction 110 (s 501 character — current as of mid-2026): Direction 99 has been revoked. Direction 110 is the current operative direction for s 501 character decision-making. Directions are renumbered on replacement; AI training data will reflect whichever direction was current at training cut-off. The operative direction must always be verified on the Federal Register of Legislation or immi.homeaffairs.gov.au before submitting any s 501 representation. Skills in Demand (SID) visa from 7 December 2024: The subclass 482 TSS visa was replaced by the Skills in Demand (SID) visa (retaining subclass number 482) from 7 December 2024. The three streams are Core Skills, Specialist Skills, and Labour Agreement (rebadging as Essential Skills in 2026). AI trained before December 2024 will describe the TSS Medium-Term, Short-Term, and Labour Agreement stream structure, which is no longer operative for new nominations. Core Skills Occupation List (CSOL) from 7 December 2024: The CSOL (456 occupations) replaced the MLTSSL and STSOL for the SID visa and ENS (186) Direct Entry stream from 7 December 2024. The MLTSSL and STSOL remain operative for points-tested skilled migration (subclasses 189, 190, 491). AI output on occupation list eligibility will frequently apply the wrong list for the wrong visa class. TSMIT/CSIT indexation: The Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold (TSMIT) is indexed annually and was $76,515 from 1 July 2025. The Core Skills Income Threshold (CSIT) for the SID visa Core Skills stream is separately set ($73,150 for 2025-26). The Specialist Skills Income Threshold (SSIT) is $141,210 from 1 July 2025. AI trained before each annual indexation will state the wrong threshold figure, causing nomination failure. Condition 8503 ('no further stay'): Many visitor and some student visa holders have condition 8503 imposed, which bars any further substantive visa application in Australia except in limited waiver circumstances under s 41(2). AI frequently fails to flag this condition when advising on onshore lodgement options, leading clients to file invalid applications and lose the fee. Engineers Australia CDR AI plagiarism detection: Engineers Australia employs Turnitin and AI detection algorithms on Competency Demonstration Reports and imposes a 12-to-36-month resubmission ban on detection, with notification to the Department of Home Affairs. AI-drafted CDR content that does not describe specific project challenges in the client's own voice is being systematically detected and rejected. Genuine Student (GS) requirement from 23 March 2024: The Genuine Student requirement replaced the Genuine Temporary Entrant criterion for student visa applications lodged from 23 March 2024. AI trained before this date will apply the GTE criterion, producing incorrect advice on student visa applications and resulting in applications that fail to address the correct statutory test.

- MARA/OMARA dual-track regulation: Australian immigration advice is regulated by a dual-track system — solicitors under the ASCR and Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW/Vic) or equivalent state legislation, and Registered Migration Agents (RMAs) under OMARA and the Migration Agents Code of Conduct. AI governance obligations apply to both tracks but through different instruments. Solicitors who are not RMAs may not provide migration assistance except as part of their legal practice.
- OMARA March 2026 AI Guidance: OMARA's published guidance (March 2026) expressly requires (a) prior written client consent before client data is entered into any AI system; (b) advance disclosure to clients that AI tools will be used; (c) the RMA retains full responsibility for accuracy regardless of AI use. Section 35 of the Code of Conduct (confidentiality) and s 53 (document security) are the operative provisions engaged when client data is entered into AI tools. These are regulatory requirements, not best practice.
- Section 280 Migration Act (unregistered immigration assistance): An AI chatbot or automated tool that provides immigration assistance to the public without real-time registered practitioner supervision may expose the firm to prosecution. This is a criminal offence, not merely a professional conduct issue. Disclaimers on AI tools do not negate criminal liability.
- ART (not AAT) from 14 October 2024: The Administrative Review Tribunal replaced the AAT on 14 October 2024. All statutory references to AAT jurisdiction in migration submissions filed after this date are wrong. The operative instruments are the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth), the ART Rules 2024 (Cth), and the ART (Migration, Protection and Character) Practice Direction 2024. AI trained before October 2024 will routinely reference the AAT as if it still exists. The ART Common Procedures Practice Direction 2026 (effective March 2026) applies to procedural matters.
- Section 477 jurisdictional time limit (35 days from ART decision): The 35-day window for judicial review in the FCC is a near-absolute jurisdictional limit — it runs from the date of the ART decision, not the date the decision is received. Extension under s 477(2) is available only in the interests of the administration of justice and is narrowly applied. AI date calculations of this period must never be relied upon.
- Ministerial Direction 110 (s 501 character — current as of mid-2026): Direction 99 has been revoked. Direction 110 is the current operative direction for s 501 character decision-making. Directions are renumbered on replacement; AI training data will reflect whichever direction was current at training cut-off. The operative direction must always be verified on the Federal Register of Legislation or immi.homeaffairs.gov.au before submitting any s 501 representation.
- Skills in Demand (SID) visa from 7 December 2024: The subclass 482 TSS visa was replaced by the Skills in Demand (SID) visa (retaining subclass number 482) from 7 December 2024. The three streams are Core Skills, Specialist Skills, and Labour Agreement (rebadging as Essential Skills in 2026). AI trained before December 2024 will describe the TSS Medium-Term, Short-Term, and Labour Agreement stream structure, which is no longer operative for new nominations.
- Core Skills Occupation List (CSOL) from 7 December 2024: The CSOL (456 occupations) replaced the MLTSSL and STSOL for the SID visa and ENS (186) Direct Entry stream from 7 December 2024. The MLTSSL and STSOL remain operative for points-tested skilled migration (subclasses 189, 190, 491). AI output on occupation list eligibility will frequently apply the wrong list for the wrong visa class.
- TSMIT/CSIT indexation: The Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold (TSMIT) is indexed annually and was $76,515 from 1 July 2025. The Core Skills Income Threshold (CSIT) for the SID visa Core Skills stream is separately set ($73,150 for 2025-26). The Specialist Skills Income Threshold (SSIT) is $141,210 from 1 July 2025. AI trained before each annual indexation will state the wrong threshold figure, causing nomination failure.
- Condition 8503 ('no further stay'): Many visitor and some student visa holders have condition 8503 imposed, which bars any further substantive visa application in Australia except in limited waiver circumstances under s 41(2). AI frequently fails to flag this condition when advising on onshore lodgement options, leading clients to file invalid applications and lose the fee.
- Engineers Australia CDR AI plagiarism detection: Engineers Australia employs Turnitin and AI detection algorithms on Competency Demonstration Reports and imposes a 12-to-36-month resubmission ban on detection, with notification to the Department of Home Affairs. AI-drafted CDR content that does not describe specific project challenges in the client's own voice is being systematically detected and rejected.
- Genuine Student (GS) requirement from 23 March 2024: The Genuine Student requirement replaced the Genuine Temporary Entrant criterion for student visa applications lodged from 23 March 2024. AI trained before this date will apply the GTE criterion, producing incorrect advice on student visa applications and resulting in applications that fail to address the correct statutory test.

## Risks to address

How it goes wrong

## Risks to address

Hallucinated migration case citations filed in the FCC or ART: JNE24 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 (Claude AI and Microsoft Copilot used without verification — four hallucinated cases, personal costs order, conduct referral) and Valu v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 95 (ChatGPT used without checking — hallucinated citations and quotes, referral to NSW Legal Services Commissioner) are both immigration matters in Australian courts. Pasuengos v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (FedCFamC2G, 3 February 2026 — full citation to be independently verified on AustLII before use) is a further reported instance. Applying superseded visa architecture: AI trained before 7 December 2024 describes the TSS (482) visa using the Medium-Term, Short-Term, and Labour Agreement stream structure that has been replaced by the Skills in Demand visa. A lawyer relying on AI output will advise on the wrong stream, wrong occupation list, and wrong income threshold, causing the nomination to fail and the non-refundable fee to be forfeited. Wrong Ministerial Direction applied to s 501 representation: AI trained before Direction 110 replaced Direction 99 will apply Direction 99's weighting schema to a character representation — the primary considerations, their weighting, and the balancing methodology differ between directions. A s 501 representation premised on the wrong direction is substantively deficient. AAT references in ART proceedings: AI trained before 14 October 2024 will refer to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, cite AAT Act provisions, and describe AAT procedures. Submissions filed with the ART containing AAT references demonstrate inadequate supervision of AI output and may be rejected or draw judicial comment. Wrong income threshold for employer sponsorship: AI states an outdated TSMIT or CSIT figure ($73,150 or earlier), causing the employer to offer a non-compliant salary — the nomination fails and must be refiled with associated delays and costs. Stale occupation list status: AI states an occupation is eligible under the CSOL or MLTSSL when it has since been removed by legislative instrument, or applies the CSOL to a subclass 189 EOI where the MLTSSL applies — the EOI or nomination fails.

- Hallucinated migration case citations filed in the FCC or ART: JNE24 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 (Claude AI and Microsoft Copilot used without verification — four hallucinated cases, personal costs order, conduct referral) and Valu v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 95 (ChatGPT used without checking — hallucinated citations and quotes, referral to NSW Legal Services Commissioner) are both immigration matters in Australian courts. Pasuengos v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (FedCFamC2G, 3 February 2026 — full citation to be independently verified on AustLII before use) is a further reported instance.
- Applying superseded visa architecture: AI trained before 7 December 2024 describes the TSS (482) visa using the Medium-Term, Short-Term, and Labour Agreement stream structure that has been replaced by the Skills in Demand visa. A lawyer relying on AI output will advise on the wrong stream, wrong occupation list, and wrong income threshold, causing the nomination to fail and the non-refundable fee to be forfeited.
- Wrong Ministerial Direction applied to s 501 representation: AI trained before Direction 110 replaced Direction 99 will apply Direction 99's weighting schema to a character representation — the primary considerations, their weighting, and the balancing methodology differ between directions. A s 501 representation premised on the wrong direction is substantively deficient.
- AAT references in ART proceedings: AI trained before 14 October 2024 will refer to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, cite AAT Act provisions, and describe AAT procedures. Submissions filed with the ART containing AAT references demonstrate inadequate supervision of AI output and may be rejected or draw judicial comment.
- Wrong income threshold for employer sponsorship: AI states an outdated TSMIT or CSIT figure ($73,150 or earlier), causing the employer to offer a non-compliant salary — the nomination fails and must be refiled with associated delays and costs.
- Stale occupation list status: AI states an occupation is eligible under the CSOL or MLTSSL when it has since been removed by legislative instrument, or applies the CSOL to a subclass 189 EOI where the MLTSSL applies — the EOI or nomination fails.

## Review checklist

The lawyer's review checklist

## Review checklist

Every case citation in any document filed with a court, tribunal, or regulatory body has been independently verified on AustLII or Jade.io for existence, correct neutral citation, correct court, and accurate proposition — mandatory after JNE24 [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 and Valu [2025] FedCFamC2G 95; record the verification step in the file. All visa subclass criteria, stream structure, occupation list status (CSOL/MLTSSL/STSOL), income thresholds (CSIT, TSMIT, SSIT), and points allocations have been verified against the current operative instrument on the Federal Register of Legislation — note the date and instrument number of the verification in the file. All deadlines stated in client advice or filed documents (s 477 35-day FCC window, ART response deadline, bridging visa expiry, partner visa secondary application, s 501 response deadline) have been calculated by the lawyer from the actual notice, not from AI output — document the calculation. The operative Ministerial Direction for any s 501 character matter has been confirmed as Direction 110 (or its current successor) on the Federal Register of Legislation — a direction number and commencement date have been recorded in the file and the AI output, if any, has been discarded and the current direction applied from the source. The client's current visa status, conditions imposed, and work/study entitlements have been confirmed from a current VEVO record and not from AI output or a document last checked more than 48 hours ago. Client personal data entered into any AI tool was subject to prior written client consent recorded in the matter file, the AI tool has a data processing agreement and Australian data residency commitment or equivalent privacy safeguard, and the tool name and consent have been documented — required by OMARA Code of Conduct ss 35, 53 and OMARA March 2026 AI Guidance. No statutory declaration, witness statement, protection claims statement, or character reference was drafted in whole or material part by AI without the client reviewing, amending, and adopting it word for word as their own account — NSW Practice Note SC Gen 23 and DPP v Khan [2024] ACTSC 19 both engage here. If AI was used for any substantive task, the client has been informed in advance in writing in accordance with OMARA March 2026 AI disclosure requirements, and that disclosure is recorded in the engagement letter or a signed amendment to it.

- Every case citation in any document filed with a court, tribunal, or regulatory body has been independently verified on AustLII or Jade.io for existence, correct neutral citation, correct court, and accurate proposition — mandatory after JNE24 [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 and Valu [2025] FedCFamC2G 95; record the verification step in the file.
- All visa subclass criteria, stream structure, occupation list status (CSOL/MLTSSL/STSOL), income thresholds (CSIT, TSMIT, SSIT), and points allocations have been verified against the current operative instrument on the Federal Register of Legislation — note the date and instrument number of the verification in the file.
- All deadlines stated in client advice or filed documents (s 477 35-day FCC window, ART response deadline, bridging visa expiry, partner visa secondary application, s 501 response deadline) have been calculated by the lawyer from the actual notice, not from AI output — document the calculation.
- The operative Ministerial Direction for any s 501 character matter has been confirmed as Direction 110 (or its current successor) on the Federal Register of Legislation — a direction number and commencement date have been recorded in the file and the AI output, if any, has been discarded and the current direction applied from the source.
- The client's current visa status, conditions imposed, and work/study entitlements have been confirmed from a current VEVO record and not from AI output or a document last checked more than 48 hours ago.
- Client personal data entered into any AI tool was subject to prior written client consent recorded in the matter file, the AI tool has a data processing agreement and Australian data residency commitment or equivalent privacy safeguard, and the tool name and consent have been documented — required by OMARA Code of Conduct ss 35, 53 and OMARA March 2026 AI Guidance.
- No statutory declaration, witness statement, protection claims statement, or character reference was drafted in whole or material part by AI without the client reviewing, amending, and adopting it word for word as their own account — NSW Practice Note SC Gen 23 and DPP v Khan [2024] ACTSC 19 both engage here.
- If AI was used for any substantive task, the client has been informed in advance in writing in accordance with OMARA March 2026 AI disclosure requirements, and that disclosure is recorded in the engagement letter or a signed amendment to it.

## Tasks (35)

| Task | Level | How AI is used | What the lawyer must review |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [Triage a refusal or cancellation decision for urgent review](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/triage-a-refusal-or-cancellation-decision-for-urgent-review.md) | Red | Extract candidate facts from a permitted decision letter and notification record into a review-triage sheet. | Decide the available review, standing and deadline from current law and the actual notification Decide any urgent protective step |
| [Reconcile a visa evidence pack with successful uploads](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/reconcile-a-visa-evidence-pack-with-successful-uploads.md) | Yellow | Compare the lawyer-approved evidence list with saved file versions and the actual upload receipts or received list. | Check identity, relevance and successful receipt for each item Do not treat the pack as submitted until each item is confirmed |
| [Check translated documents are paired and complete](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/check-translated-documents-are-paired-and-complete.md) | Yellow | Create an inventory pairing each non-English source document with its English translation and translator details. | Check identity, dates and completeness of each translation Check the applicable translation requirements before reliance |
| [Prepare a response-to-information-request checklist](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/prepare-a-response-to-information-request-checklist.md) | Yellow | Structure the actual Department or Tribunal request into a question-by-question table with candidate evidence references. | Check the response answers the exact request Confirm each factual statement is authorised and supported |
| [Build a visa-pathway longlist from the client's facts](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/build-a-visa-pathway-longlist-from-the-client-s-facts.md) | Red | From the age, occupation, history and family facts the lawyer supplies, list candidate pathways with the criteria still to check, not a recommended visa. | Verify every pathway against the current rules; visa numbers and occupation lists change Do not treat a longlist as advice |
| [Build a points or selection-grid worksheet from the client's facts](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/build-a-points-or-selection-grid-worksheet-from-the-client-s-facts.md) | Yellow | Produce a worksheet of age, language, work, qualifications and other factors the lawyer has listed, with a candidate score and missing evidence on each row. | Check the current points table Do not lodge an expression of interest from a generated score |
| [Draft a skills-assessment cover letter and competency narrative](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/draft-a-skills-assessment-cover-letter-and-competency-narrative.md) | Yellow | Produce a first-draft cover letter and competency statement from the employment evidence the lawyer has approved. | Confirm the assessing body accepts the format Do not invent duties the references do not support |
| Draft an employer-nomination and sponsored-visa cover pack | Yellow | Produce first-draft nomination and visa cover letters and a comparison table of stream criteria from the employer papers. | Confirm the current sponsored-visa architecture before you file Check stream names; they change |
| Build a partner-visa relationship-evidence index | Yellow | Sort the client's documents into financial, household, social and commitment categories and list gaps against the evidence guide the lawyer has named. | Do not invent a relationship history Check onshore/offshore and temporary/permanent stage from the actual visa record |
| [Draft representations on a character refusal or cancellation notice](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/draft-representations-on-a-character-refusal-or-cancellation-notice.md) | Red | Table the notice, the criminal history and the sentencing papers against the primary considerations and the other considerations in the ministerial direction… | The lawyer writes the representations. Work from the ministerial direction that will be in force when the decision is made, not the one in force at the date… |
| Structure protection or asylum claims and a country-information index | Red | Turn the client's statement into a claims table mapped to the refugee or complementary-protection tests, and list candidate country-information sources with… | Never file generated country information; open the dated primary source Leave the client's statement for the client to settle |
| [Draft a merits-review statement of facts and grounds](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/draft-a-merits-review-statement-of-facts-and-grounds.md) | Red | From the delegate's decision, the departmental file and the evidence index, tabulate each adverse finding against the criterion it turns on, build the visa… | The lawyer writes the statement and the grounds, then checks their own text: every asserted fact traceable to a document in the index or to the client's… |
| [Draft a judicial-review outline from the tribunal or department decision](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/draft-a-judicial-review-outline-from-the-tribunal-or-department-decision.md) | Red | Tabulate each finding in the Tribunal's or delegate's written reasons against the evidence cited for it and the criterion it was decided under, and flag… | The lawyer writes each ground and then checks their own outline: that every ground is pleaded as jurisdictional error and not a re-argument of the merits, and… |
| Build a visa-condition and bridging or interim-visa checklist | Yellow | Extract the conditions from the grant notice into a plain-language checklist, and list bridging or interim-visa options the lawyer has named with missing… | Read the actual grant notice Do not infer conditions from other clients' visas |
| Build a status chronology for a person who may be out of status | Yellow | From the visa history papers, produce a chronology of grants, expiries and movements, with gaps where the record is missing. | Determine status from the live record, not the chronology labels Do not treat this as a detection-risk opinion |
| Build a student-visa compliance and genuine-study checklist | Yellow | From the enrolment and visa papers, list course, attendance, work-hour and genuine-study facts still needed, with document references. | Confirm the current genuine-student test Do not file a generated study statement |
| Draft a plain-language status letter from the grant or request notice | Yellow | Turn the grant notice, request-for-information or hearing notice into a plain-language client letter with dates and required actions listed. | Take every date, visa class and condition from the notice Do not add advice the notice does not support |
| Draft a filing cover letter and exhibit list | Yellow | Produce a cover letter and a numbered exhibit list from the approved evidence pack, matching each item to a criterion. | Check identity documents and that every exhibit is the version that will be uploaded Do not add an exhibit the client has not given you |
| Draft a client declaration or interview-question list from the facts | Red | The tool writes no part of the client’s declaration — no draft, no first draft, no scaffold, no suggested paragraphs — because the declaration records the… | Keep the client's words as the client's Remove anything the file does not support Never put identifying facts into a public tool |
| Index country-of-origin reports with dates and publishers | Green | From the reports the lawyer has collected, build an index by claim, date and publisher, and list claims that still have no source. | Open each report Do not let the tool fetch or invent country information |
| [Obtain client consent before using AI in immigration assistance](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/obtain-client-consent-before-using-ai-in-immigration-assistance.md) | Green | Draft an advance notice and written consent form for AI use with client personal information. | Confirm OMARA guidance (primary page) and Code obligations. |
| [Verify authorities in a migration submission before lodging](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/verify-authorities-in-a-migration-submission-before-lodging.md) | Red | Check each cited case and provision. | WA lawyer referred after Claude-generated fake citations. |
| [Comply with OMARA AI expectations for registered agents](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/comply-with-omara-ai-expectations-for-registered-agents.md) | Yellow | Map practice to OMARA AI guidance. | Agent verifies every authority personally. |
| [Prepare ART migration submissions with AI disclosure](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/prepare-art-migration-submissions-with-ai-disclosure.md) | Yellow | Follow ART PD on Gen AI. | Disclose and verify. |
| [Summarise country-information reports for a protection claim](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/summarise-country-information-reports-for-a-protection-claim.md) | Yellow | Summarise with page pinpoints. | Check against the source. |
| [Translate client documents with AI and certify](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/translate-client-documents-with-ai-and-certify.md) | Yellow | Use AI translation then human-certified review. | Department requires accredited translation. |
| Verify citations in migration judicial review submissions | Green | Check every authority exists and supports the proposition. | Lawyer signs off; the FedCFamC2G AI cases apply. |
| Summarise a Tribunal decision record for review grounds | Yellow | Extract findings and reasoning. | Lawyer identifies jurisdictional error. |
| Translate client documents for internal use | Yellow | Produce working translations. | Use an accredited translation for lodgement. |
| Complete Form 80 personal particulars from the client's passport and travel history | Yellow | Place passport and travel details onto Form 80 after written consent to use the tool. | Get written consent before personal details go into a tool. Match every answer to a client document. |
| Draft a partner-visa submission that cites criteria in the Migration Regulations 1994 | Yellow | Draft the submission from the client's instructions and the criteria the lawyer has opened in the Regulations. | Open the Migration Regulations compilation and confirm each criterion. Get written consent before personal details go into a tool. |
| Draft a visitor-visa covering letter from the client's instructions | Yellow | Draft the letter from the instructions only. | Delete any travel or purpose the client did not state. Get written consent first. |
| Mark passages in a draft visa submission that would be immigration assistance under the Migration Act 1958 | Red | Highlight passages for the lawyer. Do not decide whether an offence is committed. | The lawyer reads section 280 and decides whether a passage is immigration assistance. |
| Draft the advance explanation and written consent before Form 80 answers are entered into an AI tool | Yellow | Draft the explanation that an artificial intelligence tool will be used on Form 80, for the client to sign. | The explanation must match what the tool will actually receive. Do not enter the Form 80 answers before the consent is signed. |
| Prepare a file note of Migration Act 1958 section 280 before a staff member uses an AI draft of a visa letter | Red | Quote the section from the legislation compilation. Do not paraphrase the offence. | The lawyer reads section 280 on the Federal Register and writes the file note. |

## Jurisdiction notes

### Australia

#### Legal sources

Migration Act 1958 (Cth) and its subordinate instruments, administered by the Department of Home Affairs. Instruments change often and without notice.

#### Review bodies

The Administrative Review Tribunal (which replaced the AAT on 14 October 2024), the Federal Circuit and Family Court and the Federal Court.

#### No second chance

Errors cannot be fixed once an application is lodged, a time limit passes or a character cancellation is actioned.

#### Invented citations

In JNE24 v Minister [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 and Valu v Minister (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 95, invented migration citations led to personal costs orders and conduct referrals.

- Never file an AI-sourced citation with the FCC, Federal Court or ART until the lawyer checks it on AustLII or Jade.io for existence and the proposition.
- No AI immigration assistance to clients (chatbot or intake) without live supervision by a registered agent or lawyer; unregistered help is an offence (s 280).

Sources:

- [Administrative Review Tribunal: Immigration and citizenship](https://www.art.gov.au/applying-review/immigration-and-citizenship) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [Department of Home Affairs: Attach documents to your application](https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/help-support/applying-online-or-on-paper/online/attach-documents-to-your-application) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [Department of Home Affairs: Check twice, submit once](https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/check-twice-submit-once) (checked 2026-09-16)

### New Zealand

#### Governing law

Immigration Act 2009 and INZ operational instructions. No visa subclasses 189, 482 or 866.

#### Appeals

The Immigration and Protection Tribunal hears residence, refugee and protection, and deportation appeals. It is listed in the Courts of New Zealand GenAI guidelines.

#### Judicial review

In the High Court, not the ART or the Federal Circuit and Family Court. Character cancellation is not Migration Act s 501.

- Do not file a generated citation, quote or statutory reference until you have opened it in legislation.govt.nz or a trusted case database.
- Do not enter private, confidential, suppressed or privileged material into a public chatbot.

Sources:

- [Immigration Act 2009](https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2009/51/en/latest/) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [Immigration New Zealand: immigration law](https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/immigration-policy-and-law/immigration-law/) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [Ministry of Justice: Immigration and Protection Tribunal](https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/immigration/immigration-and-protection/) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [Courts of New Zealand: GenAI guidelines — Lawyers (7 December 2023)](https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/6-Going-to-Court/practice-directions/practice-guidelines/all-benches/20231207-GenAI-Guidelines-Lawyers.pdf) (checked 2026-09-23)

### United States

Local name: Immigration and nationality

#### Governing law

Federal: the INA, DHS/USCIS and EOIR.

#### EOIR PM 25-40

8 August 2025: no blanket ban and no mandatory AI disclosure in Immigration Court or BIA filings. Individual adjudicators may adopt standing orders.

#### Discipline

False AI content risks discipline, including 8 C.F.R. § 1003.102(c). PM 25-40 points to Formal Opinion 512, including client consultation on AI use.

- Do not file an immigration brief whose authorities you have not opened. EOIR will treat fabricated citations as a professional-conduct problem.

Sources:

- [EOIR Policy Memorandum PM 25-40 (8 August 2025)](https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1410621/dl?inline) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [ABA Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (29 July 2024)](https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-512.pdf) (checked 2026-09-23)

## Sources

- [Administrative Review Tribunal: Immigration and citizenship](https://www.art.gov.au/applying-review/immigration-and-citizenship) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [Department of Home Affairs: Attach documents to your application](https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/help-support/applying-online-or-on-paper/online/attach-documents-to-your-application) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [Department of Home Affairs: Check twice, submit once](https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/check-twice-submit-once) (checked 2026-09-16)

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*