Benson and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Benson to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for review of decisions made by Comcare. The dispute centred on whether the AAT had jurisdiction to review either Comcare's 2014 determination regarding Ms Benson's psychological condition or a subsequent 2019 decision by Comcare to refuse an extension of time for Ms Benson to request reconsideration of that 2014 determination. The Tribunal, constituted by W Frost M, was required to determine which, if either, of these decisions was a "reviewable decision" for the purposes of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (SRC Act).

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Comcare's refusal to grant an extension of time to request reconsideration of a determination constituted a reviewable decision, and consequently, whether the Tribunal possessed jurisdiction to review such a refusal. Relatedly, the Tribunal had to determine if Comcare's original 2014 determination itself was a reviewable decision. The Tribunal considered the legislative framework for review under the SRC Act, specifically sections 60, 61, 62, and 64, and relevant case law, including *Beecher and Telstra Corporation Limited* and *Novosel v Comcare*.

The Tribunal reasoned that under section 64(1) of the SRC Act, the AAT has jurisdiction to review a "reviewable decision." It clarified that a reviewable decision, as defined by the Act and confirmed by precedent, includes a decision by a determining authority to allow or refuse a person a further period to request reconsideration of a determination under section 62(3)(b). In this instance, Ms Benson had failed to request reconsideration of the 2014 determination within the prescribed timeframe. Comcare subsequently refused her request for an extension of time in April 2019. The Tribunal found that this refusal to grant an extension of time was itself a reviewable decision. Conversely, the Tribunal determined that the original 2014 determination was not a reviewable decision capable of direct review by the AAT.

The Tribunal ordered that it had jurisdiction in relation to the reviewable decision of Comcare dated 29 April 2019, which was the refusal to grant an extension of time. However, the Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction in relation to the determination of Comcare dated 10 November 2014. The matter was to proceed to hearing concerning the reviewable decision.