Coventry and National Disability Insurance Agency

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking access to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). The applicant, a former farmer diagnosed with Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS), contended that his condition resulted in significant functional limitations. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the disability requirements under section 24 of the *National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013* (NDIS Act), specifically concerning a substantially reduced functional capacity to undertake certain activities, or the early intervention requirements under section 25.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant's impairments, stemming from AS, led to a substantially reduced functional capacity in one or more of the activities listed in section 24(1)(c) of the NDIS Act. This involved assessing whether the applicant's condition meant he was unable to participate effectively or completely in activities such as communication, social interaction, learning, mobility, self-care, or self-management without specific assistive technology, equipment, home modifications, or assistance from others. The Tribunal also needed to consider if other service systems would be more appropriate for the assistance the applicant sought.

Deputy President Mischin P applied Rule 5.8 of the NDIS Rules, which provides a deeming provision for substantially reduced functional capacity. This rule states that such capacity exists if a person is unable to participate effectively or completely in an activity without assistive technology, equipment (other than commonly used items), or home modifications, or if they usually require assistance from others, or if they cannot participate even with such aids or assistance. The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence regarding his AS, which causes stiffness and pain affecting his mobility, ability to bend, and neck movement, but noted he did not have difficulty moving his arms. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's living situation and proximity to essential services.

Ultimately, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant's impairments, attributable to his AS, resulted in a substantially reduced functional capacity to undertake any of the activities specified in section 24(1)(c) of the NDIS Act. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the applicant was not found to meet the criteria for access to the NDIS based on these grounds.