Boyd and NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE AGENCY (NDIS) - [2025] ARTA 2261

Boyd and NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE AGENCY (NDIS) [2025] ARTA 2261 (27 October 2025)
Applicant/s:  William Maximilian Boyd
Respondent:  NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE AGENCY
Tribunal Number:                2023/5356

Tribunal:General Member Gooch
Place:Adelaide
Date:27 October 2025

Decision:

The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review dated 26 April 2023 and pursuant to section 105(c)(i) of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 in substitution decides the Applicant meets the disability requirements in section 24 of the National Disability Insurance Act 2013 and consequently meets the access criteria in section 21 of that Act.
Statement made on 27 October 2025 at 1:28pm
Catchwords
NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE SCHEME – reviewable decision of Chief Executive Officer – becoming a participant- access request- whether applicant meets the access criteria – whether applicant has an autism diagnosis – List A and B conditions - whether applicant meets the disability requirement – whether applicant has impairments which are, or likely to be permanent – whether impairment or impairments result in substantially reduced functional capacity – whether likely to require supports under the NDIS for his lifetime – decision set aside – disability and access requirements met
Legislation
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (Cth) Schedule 16, item 24.
National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth), ss 3, 4, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 209
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Act 2024 Items 14, 126 and 138 of Schedule 1
National Disability Insurance Scheme (Becoming a Participant) Rules 2013 (Cth); rr 5.4, 5.8
Cases
Re Drake and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (No. 2) (1979) 2 ALD 634
Davis v National Disability Insurance Agency [2022] FCA 1002
Foster and National Disability Insurance Agency [2025] ARTA 718
Madelaine and the National Disability Insurance Agency [2020] AATA 4025
Mulligan v National Disability Insurance Agency [2015] FCA 544
National Disability Insurance Agency v Foster [2023] FCAFC 11
National Disability Insurance Agency v Lampard [2025] FCAFC 139
Secondary Materials
Productivity Commission Report, Disability Care and Support
Applying to the NDIS Guideline and Appendices dated 10 December 2024

This is a review of a decision by a delegate of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the National Disability Insurance Agency (the Agency) to reject an application by Mr Boyd to access the National Disability Insurance Scheme (the Scheme).
Mr Boyd is a 21-year-old man living with his mother and a younger brother. His younger brother is a current participant in the Scheme having gained access due to impairments attributable to autism spectrum disorder - level 3.
Mr Boyd originally applied for access to the Scheme in 2022 on the basis of impairments to which psychosocial disabilities are attributable arising from a range of diagnoses, including social phobia/anxiety, moderate depression, obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), Tourette’s syndrome, emotional regulation issues, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and pollakiuria.[1]
[1] Page 69 of Exhibit 1
On 24 January 2023 a delegate of…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Boyd and NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE AGENCY (NDIS)

Details

AGLC: Boyd and NATIONAL DISABILITY INSURANCE AGENCY (NDIS) [2025] ARTA 2261
Case: [2025] ARTA 2261
Decision Date: 27 October 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mr. Boyd applied for review of a decision by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIS) that he did not meet the access criteria for participation in the NDIS. The dispute was heard by the Administrative Review Tribunal (Tribunal) over three days via MS Teams video conference. The Tribunal found that Mr. Boyd met the access criteria and substituted its decision for that of the NDIS. The primary legal issue was whether Mr. Boyd had a disability that met the access criteria under section 21 of the NDIS Act. This involved determining if Mr. Boyd's impairments were likely to be permanent, resulted in substantially reduced functional capacity, and would require NDIS supports for his lifetime. The Tribunal considered expert evidence and medical reports, concluding that Mr. Boyd's conditions met the statutory requirements. The Tribunal emphasised the importance of recognising the rights of persons with disabilities to self-determination and independence, as intended by the NDIS Act. The Tribunal found that the NDIS had erred in its decision and substituted its decision that Mr. Boyd met the access criteria for the NDIS. The Tribunal set aside the NDIS's decision and substituted its own, finding that Mr. Boyd met the disability and access requirements under the NDIS Act.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

On 6 April 2023 Mr Boyd applied for an internal review of this decision and on 26 April 2023 another delegate of the CEO affirmed the decision (the decision under review). On 24 July 2023 Mr Boyd applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the AAT) for review of this decision. From 14 October 2024 the AAT became the Administrative Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’). Under the transitional provisions in the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (the Transitional Act), applications for review to the AAT that were not finalised before 14 October 2024 are taken to be applications for review to the Tribunal. The Transitional Act gives the Tribunal the authority to continue and finalise any aspect of the review not already completed by the AAT.[2] This decision and statement of reasons is made by the Tribunal.[2] Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (Cth) Schedule 16, item 24 A hearing was held over three days on 28-29 August and 2 September 2025 and was conducted by MS Teams video conference. At the hearing the applicant did not have legal representation but was supported by Mr Saade from the family’s support work provider. The Agency was represented by Mr Hay of Counsel instructed by Moray and Agnew Lawyers. Documents considered included:a.Joint tender hearing Bundle – Exhibit 1b.Statement of Ali Mohamad – Exhibit 2 The Tribunal heard oral evidence from:·Mr Boyd, the applicant·Ms Boyd, his mother·Mr Mohummad, support worker·Mr Felix Ip, Occupational therapist,·Mr Martin Exell, Clinical psychologist and·Dr Mandy Vidovich, Neuropsychologist. For the reasons set out below the Tribunal sets aside the decision and substitutes it with a decision the applicant meets the access requirements in section 21 of the NDIS Act. The development of the Scheme proceeded on the basis of a report of the Productivity Commission inquiry into disability care and support in Australia.[3][3] Productivity Commission Report, Disability Care and Support In instituting the recommendations from the Productivity Commission’s report, parliament sought to provide a Scheme which recognised the rights of persons with a disability to self-determination, dignity and the opportunity to live independently as fully participating citizens. This goal was to be balanced by the need to maintain the financial sustainability of the Scheme.[4] [4] Ss 3 and 4 of the NDIS Act. The NDIS Act provided for the Agency whose role was to manage the Scheme and to:a.Provide general services in the form of co-ordination, strategic or referral services or activities for people with a disability generally;[5]b.Provide funding for persons or entities to enable them to assist people with a disability generally by way of information, building community capacity or by helping people to participate in economic or social life;[6] c.Assist in developing the disability sector by facilitating innovation, research and best practice standards and to assist in building community awareness about disabilities;[7] and d.Create individual plans providing funding for reasonable and necessary supports for those persons who meet the access criteria to become full participants in the Scheme.[8][5] S13 of NDIS Act[6] S14 of NDIS Act[7] S8 of the NDIS Act[8] Section 18 of the NDIS Act

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.