CNPG and Secretary, Department of Education

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a dispute between CNPG and the Secretary, Department of Education, concerning the remission of HECS-HELP debts. CNPG, a former member of the Australian Defence Force, sought remission of debts incurred for units of study in Semester 1 and Semester 2 of 2017, alleging severe mental health issues impacted her ability to withdraw before the respective census dates. Her initial request for remission was refused by Federation University Australia (FUA), and an internal review also confirmed this decision. CNPG subsequently applied to the Tribunal for a review of FUA's decision.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the decision of FUA was amenable to review, and if so, whether CNPG qualified for the remission of her HECS-HELP debts. The Tribunal was required to consider the legislative provisions of the *Higher Education Support Act 2003* (HES Act) and the *Administration Guidelines* in force at the time, specifically the criteria for "special circumstances" which must be beyond the person's control, not make their full impact until on or after the census date, and make it impracticable to complete the unit's requirements. The Tribunal also had to determine if the communication of FUA's internal review decision, which was initially provided orally and then in writing the day after CNPG lodged her application for review, constituted a reviewable decision.

The Tribunal reasoned that despite some procedural irregularities in the communication of FUA's decision, it was satisfied that a decision had been made in fact and that the decision-maker had purported to exercise the relevant power under the HES Act. Applying the principle that the Tribunal should be accessible and pragmatic, it found the decision amenable to review, distinguishing the case from *Brian Lawlor* where no power to make the decision existed. Regarding the remission of debts, CNPG conceded that there was no basis for her claim concerning the Semester 2 units. However, she maintained her claim for the Semester 1 units, arguing that a severe flare-up of her mental health in that semester was an abnormal and distressing experience beyond her control, which made it impracticable for her to complete her studies.

The Tribunal ultimately set aside the decision under review and substituted a new decision. It remitted the HECS-HELP debt for the Semester 1 units, finding that CNPG's severe mental health flare-up met the criteria for special circumstances under the HES Act and Guidelines. However, the Tribunal confirmed the decision to refuse remission for the Semester 2 units, as CNPG no longer pressed that part of her claim.