---
title: "Draft a judicial-review outline for the Federal Court or FCFCOA"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/draft-a-judicial-review-outline-from-the-tribunal-or-department-decision/commonwealth"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A30-T1-R9-CTH"
practice_area: "Immigration & Migration Law"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["CTH"]
last_reviewed: "2026-10-02"
---

# Draft a judicial-review outline for the Federal Court or FCFCOA

> Tabulate each finding in the reasons against the evidence cited for it, and, from the ART decision date, schedule the 35-day s 477 limit and any s 477(2) extension.…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law/draft-a-judicial-review-outline-from-the-tribunal-or-department-decision/commonwealth  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-02

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

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Immigration & Migration Law](https://ailawframework.com/practice/immigration-and-migration-law.md) |
| Human involvement | Red: Lawyer writes; AI may check, clarify or collect data |
| How AI is used | Tabulate each finding in the reasons against the evidence cited for it, and, from the ART decision date, schedule the 35-day s 477 limit and any s 477(2) extension. The tool writes no part of the judicial-review outline: no draft ground, no first draft, no skeleton, no suggested wording. Check the lawyer’s own outline against the Federal Court or FCFCOA filing requirements and the current migration practice note. |
| What the lawyer must review | Verify every authority on AustLII Note invented cases in JNE24 [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314, Valu [2025] FedCFamC2G 95, Pasuengos (Feb 2026) Check the 35-day s 477 limit from the ART decision date and any s 477(2) extension Apply the provision for the decision class Check the current migration practice note |
| Written for | Commonwealth |
| Applies to | [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) |

## Checking plan

**Source-by-source verification**

Trace relied-on content to independent sources and check for relevant material the output has missed.

- What the AI does: Potential support includes organising research leads and preparing preliminary structure or wording. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Open each relied-on authority independently. Confirm its existence, current status, proposition and any quotation or pinpoint reference.
2. Trace every relied-on figure to its source, confirm dates and assumptions, and independently recalculate totals or derived amounts.
3. Calculate operative dates independently from the current rule and actual triggering event. Check exceptions and record the verified deadline.
4. Check the current court or regulator requirements, prescribed form and attachments for the intended document and filing.
5. Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
6. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
7. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

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