Abdelmalek and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) by an applicant who sought to rely on impairments arising from rheumatoid arthritis, sensorineural hearing loss, Meniere’s disease, and osteoporosis. The applicant’s general practitioner and an occupational therapist provided evidence regarding the impact of these conditions on her daily life, including pain, mobility limitations, and difficulties with self-care tasks. The NDIS, represented by the National Disability Insurance Agency, contended that while some impairments were accepted as permanent, those arising from Meniere’s disease and osteoporosis were not sufficiently demonstrated to be permanent. Furthermore, the NDIS argued that the applicant had not established a substantially reduced functional capacity in any of the specified domains, nor did she meet the early intervention requirements for access to the scheme.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant had a disability attributable to one or more intellectual, cognitive, neurological, sensory, or physical impairments, and if so, whether these impairments were permanent. The Tribunal also needed to assess whether these permanent impairments resulted in a substantially reduced functional capacity to undertake activities such as communication, social interaction, learning, mobility, self-care, or self-management. Finally, if the disability requirements were not met, the AAT had to consider whether the applicant satisfied the early intervention requirements for NDIS access.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal accepted that the applicant had disabilities attributable to physical impairments from rheumatoid arthritis and sensory impairments from hearing loss, satisfying the first limb of the access criteria. The Tribunal found the impairments from rheumatoid arthritis and sensorineural hearing loss to be permanent. While Meniere’s disease was acknowledged as a lifelong condition, the Tribunal found that the associated symptoms of vertigo and impaired balance were intermittent and well-managed by medication, and that the hearing loss was a consequence of this disease. Regarding osteoporosis, the Tribunal found insufficient evidence of any resulting impairment. Crucially, the Tribunal concluded that despite some limitations, the applicant’s impairments did not result in a substantially reduced functional capacity in any of the specified domains, including mobility, self-care, self-management, communication, social interaction, or learning. The Tribunal also found that the applicant did not meet the early intervention requirements, as there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that such supports would likely reduce her future needs or improve her functional capacity.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant did not meet the disability requirements under section 24 of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth), nor the early intervention requirements under section 25 of the Act, to access the NDIS.