If you are unsatisfied with a decision made by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) under the Agvet Code or the Agvet Code Regulations, you may be able to either:

  • request that the APVMA review the decision (that is, seek internal review) within 42 days from the date that the decision was made (pursuant to section 166)
  • apply to the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) for review of the decision in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (pursuant to section 167).

We may only undertake an internal review of a decision if it falls within section 166(1) or section 166(1A) of the Agvet Code.

Section 166(1) applies if both:

  • a decision on a particular matter (the original decision) has been made under the Agvet Code on behalf of the APVMA by a staff member of the APVMA
  • the person seeking the internal review is entitled to apply under section 167 of the Agvet Code to the ART for review of the original decision.

Section 166(1A) applies if:

  • a decision on a particular matter (the original decision) has been made under the Agvet Code on behalf of the APVMA by a staff member of the APVMA,
  • the original decision is of a kind referred to in section 166(1A)(b) (generally, a decision to refuse certain applications based only on requirements set out in sections 8A(a), 8A(b) or 122(1), as the case may be)
  • the original decision was reviewable by the ART, a person would be entitled to apply to the ART for review of the original decision.

When we review a decision, we must confirm, vary or set aside the original decision and make a new decision in substitution for the original decision. We must then notify the person who made the request of our decision on the review as soon as practicable.

If we have not given notice on the internal review decision within 90 days after the request was made, the person who made the request may, by writing, notify us that they consider that the APVMA has confirmed the original decision.

The ART may also review certain decision (that is, those set out in section 167 of the Agvet Code).

ART review is not available for certain APVMA decisions, such as a decision to refuse certain applications based only on the requirements set out in sections 8A(a), 8A(b) or 122(1), as the case may be).

APVMA decisions listed under section 167 of the Agvet Code that can be reviewed by the ART

  • A decision under subsection 14(1) to approve or register a constituent, product or label:

    (i) with an instruction or relevant particular other than an instruction or particular set out in the application for the approval or registration, or

    (ii) subject to particular conditions

  • A decision under subsection 14(2) to refuse an application for approval or registration, other than a decision based only on requirements set out in paragraph 8A(a) or (b)
  • A decision under subsection 26C(1)(b) to refuse an application to vary relevant particulars, other than a decision based only on requirements set out in paragraph 8A(a) or (b)
  • A decision under subsection 29(2) to refuse an application to vary relevant particulars or conditions, other than a decision based only on requirements set out in paragraph 8A(a) or (b)
  • A decision under subsection 34A(1) or 34AF(3) to vary relevant particulars or conditions
  • A decision (the information decision) under subsection 34J(3) that the APVMA is satisfied that it is in the public interest to use information that section 34G would otherwise prohibit the APVMA from using for making a decision (the substantive decision)
  • A decision under section 34AA or Division 5 of Part 2 to suspend or cancel the approval of an active constituent for a proposed or existing chemical product, the registration of a chemical product or the approval of a label for containers for a chemical product
  • A decision under subsection 48(3) refusing to accept a late application
  • A decision to use protected information under paragraph 59(2)(d)
  • A decision under subsection 74(2), 75(2), 76(2) or 78(2) extending, or refusing to extend, a period
  • A decision under subsection 81(3) shortening, extending or refusing to extend a period
  • A decision under section 99 to issue a notice
  • A decision to issue a recall notice
  • A decision under Part 7 to refuse an application for a permit, other than a decision based only on requirements set out in paragraph 8A(a) or (b) or a requirement made by the APVMA under subparagraph 111(1)(b)(iii)
  • A decision under Part 7 to issue a permit subject to particular conditions or for a particular period only
  • A decision under Part 7 to refuse to extend a permit other than a decision based only on requirements set out in paragraph 8A(a) or (b)
  • A decision under section 118, 119, 119A or 119B to suspend or cancel a permit
  • A decision under Part 8 to refuse an application for a licence other than a decision based only on requirements set out in subsection 122(1)
  • A decision under Part 8 to issue a licence subject to particular conditions referred to in subsection 126(1)
  • A decision under subsection 126(2) to impose a new condition on a licence or vary an existing condition
  • A decision under section 127 to suspend or cancel a licence
  • A decision to disclose information to an authority or organisation under paragraph 162(3)(d) without the consent of the applicant or holder concerned
  • A decision to disclose information under section 163
  • A decision under subsection 164(8) to refuse to waive or remit the whole or a part of a fee
  • A decision under this Code prescribed by the regulations

Note that, despite paragraph 167(1)(ea), you may not apply to the ART for review of the information decision if we stated in the notice of that decision given under section 34K that we believed it was necessary to make the substantive decision before 28 days had elapsed after giving the notice, to prevent imminent risk to persons of death, serious injury or serious illness.

What information can the APVMA consider in an internal review?

If you make an application seeking an internal review of a decision, we must review that decision by having regard only to the information used to make that decision.

In an internal review, we will not consider further information or new information provided after the original decision is made.

You are able to make a new application (where appropriate) if new information has become available after your original application has been decided, even if that decision is under internal review.

Content last updated:
Content last reviewed: