Ministerial intervention has no fee. On paper that makes it the cheapest step in the visa system. In practice it is the step we advise against most often. The Minister holds personal powers under the Migration Act to substitute a better outcome for a Tribunal decision. The Minister does not have to look at any request. Most requests are closed by the Department without reaching the Minister at all. This note explains where the power sits and what the September 2025 instructions demand. It also sets out how we decide whether a request is worth the time it costs.
In short: A ministerial intervention request has no fee, but the Minister has no duty to consider it and cannot be compelled. It follows a Tribunal decision, which costs $3,727 to obtain, and the guidelines refer only requests showing unique or exceptional circumstances.
Where it sits in the sequence
- RefusalThe Department refuses the visa and the review period starts from notification.
- ReviewAn application to the Administrative Review Tribunal, with the $3,727 fee, usually within 21 days for an onshore decision.
- Tribunal decisionThe Tribunal affirms the refusal. Only now does a section 351 request become available.
- RequestA written request with evidence goes to the Department, which assesses it against the ministerial instructions.
- Referral or closureRequests that meet the threshold are referred with a submission. The rest are closed without the Minister seeing them.
- DecisionThe Minister may intervene, decline to intervene, or decline to consider the request at all.
The review stage is covered in our note on the Tribunal. Nothing in the intervention stage repairs a review that was lodged late or not at all.
Is a request available to you?
Has the Tribunal decided your case?
What the power is and is not
| The Minister can | The Minister cannot be made to |
|---|---|
| Substitute a more favourable decision for a Tribunal decision under section 351. | Consider a request at all. |
| Do the same for certain protection related decisions under section 501J. | Give reasons for declining to consider. |
| Lift the bar on some applicants applying onshore under subsection 46A(2). | Grant a bridging visa because a request is pending. |
| Allow a further protection application under subsection 48B(1). | Extend a review or court deadline. |
| Act only personally, on a submission from the Department. | Have the decision reviewed by the Tribunal or a court on its merits. |
What the 2025 instructions ask for
In 2023 the High Court decided Davis v Minister for Immigration. It held that departmental officers could not close requests by applying the Minister's personal criteria as if they were law. A backlog followed. On 4 September 2025 the Minister signed three new instructions covering sections 351 and 501J, subsection 46A(2) and subsection 48B(1). They replace subjective screening with stated thresholds.
The circumstances the instructions treat as appropriate for referral are narrow. Serious harm to an Australian citizen or permanent resident, especially a child. Circumstances that engage Australia's international obligations. Exceptional economic, scientific, cultural or other benefit to Australia. Situations the legislation plainly did not anticipate, where the outcome is unfair. Hardship on return that is specific to the person rather than general to the country.
The circumstances listed as inappropriate are the ones we see most. Repeat requests with nothing new. Matters the Tribunal already weighed. People who can apply for another visa. Hardship shared by everyone in the same position, such as a wish to keep a job in Australia. Requests made mainly to stay longer.
The employer's evidence
A sponsored worker whose review has failed cannot ask the employer to make the request. The affected person requests. The employer can still matter, under the benefit heading. A business may be able to show contracts at risk, local staff trained by the worker, or a regional service that stops without them. That is evidence the Tribunal never had to weigh. Our commercial practice assembles that evidence from the documents the business already holds: supply contracts, payroll, training records and client letters. A statement from a director carries weight when every sentence points to a document.
Can the company lodge the request for its employee?
No. The request is made by, or on behalf of, the person the Tribunal decision affects. The company's role is evidentiary. A letter from the business should state facts, attach the documents that prove them, and say what happens to the business without the worker. It should not argue the law or plead.
Status while the request sits
A request does not create a bridging visa. If the bridging visa tied to the review has ended, a Bridging visa E may be available, often without work rights. A person who is unlawful is expected to resolve their status or depart, and a pending request does not change that. Other clocks keep running too. The period for judicial review of the Tribunal decision does not stop because a request has been lodged.
How we decide
Three questions settle it. Is there a Tribunal decision? Is there something exceptional the Tribunal could not consider, or that has arisen since? Is there another visa, onshore or offshore, that would resolve the situation sooner? If the third answer is yes, the request usually loses to the other visa. Where the answers point to a request, Deepika Khurana prepares it as a single package against the instruction headings. Her profile is on the team page. The migration practice can give a view on whether a request is realistic from the Tribunal's reasons alone. Send them to us before anything is lodged.
Figures verified against Home Affairs visa pricing as at 1 July 2026.
Frequently asked questions
Can I lodge a request while my Tribunal case is still open?
No. A section 351 request responds to a decision of the Tribunal. Until the Tribunal has decided, there is nothing for the Minister to substitute.
Does a request give me work rights or stop removal?
No. A request creates no visa and no bridging visa. Your status has to be resolved separately, usually by a bridging visa application, and the Department can still act on an unlawful status.
What counts as new information?
Evidence the Tribunal did not have and could not have weighed, or events since its decision. A new diagnosis with a specialist report, a child born in Australia, or a changed country situation are examples. A better version of the old argument is not.
Can my employer write to the Minister for me?
Not as the requester. The employer's letter is evidence within your request. It should describe the role, the effect of your departure on the business, and attach the documents that prove both.
Is there a limit on how many requests I can make?
There is no fixed number. However, a repeat request with no significant new information is listed in the instructions as inappropriate for referral. A second request needs something the first did not have.
General information as at 2 September 2026. Not legal advice. Ministerial intervention is discretionary and depends on your facts. Speak to a lawyer before relying on any of it.