Brockett and National Disability Insurance Agency

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of Ms Brockett and the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). Ms Brockett, an adult participant in the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) with partial hearing and vision impairments, sought funding for specific hearing aids, the "Resound LiNX Quattro 7 rechargeable hearing aids + charger." The NDIA had initially declined to include these hearing aids in her statement of participant supports, a decision that was affirmed on review. Ms Brockett sought a further review of this decision by the AAT.

The primary legal issue before the AAT was whether the requested hearing aids met the criteria of being "reasonable and necessary" under section 34(1) of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth). Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the requested supports were most appropriately funded or provided through the NDIS, as required by section 34(1)(f) of the Act, and whether the NDIA had adequately considered Ms Brockett's specific disabilities and the value for money of the proposed supports.

The Tribunal reasoned that for a support to be considered "reasonable and necessary," it must not be more appropriately funded or provided through other general systems of service delivery. The NDIA contended that the requested hearing aids might be available through the Hearing Services Program (HSP). The Tribunal accepted evidence that the HSP, funded by the Department of Health and delivered by Hearing Australia, offers a wide range of hearing devices, including those with rechargeable options, and provides specialist hearing services for clients with complex communication needs at no charge. These specialist services include access to higher-level technology and ongoing support. Given the availability of comprehensive hearing services and devices through the HSP, the Tribunal found that the criterion under section 34(1)(f) was not met.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, concluding that the requested hearing aids were not most appropriately funded or provided through the NDIS, as alternative supports were available through the Hearing Services Program.