CRWR and National Disability Insurance Agency
Case
•
[2021] AATA 2514
•26 July 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
CRWR and National Disability Insurance Agency [2021] AATA 2514
[2021] AATA 2514
26 July 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application by CRWR (the Applicant) for review of a decision made by the National Disability Insurance Agency (the Agency). The dispute concerned the Applicant's request for travel costs to enable reasonable and necessary supports to be provided to him in his home. The Agency contended that these travel costs were not subject to an internal review decision and therefore the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to review the request.
The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed jurisdiction to review the Applicant's request for travel costs. This required an examination of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (NDIS Act) and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (AAT Act) to determine which decisions were reviewable by the Tribunal. Specifically, the Tribunal had to ascertain if the request for travel costs fell within the scope of decisions that could be reviewed under the NDIS Act.
The Tribunal reasoned that the jurisdiction of the AAT to review decisions under the NDIS Act is conferred by the NDIS Act itself. Section 99 of the NDIS Act lists the decisions that are reviewable, and for the purposes of this case, the relevant decision was the approval of the statement of participant supports within a participant's plan, as provided by section 99(1) item 4. The Tribunal noted that a participant's plan, prepared under section 32, must include a statement of participant supports under section 33(2). This statement specifies the general supports and the reasonable and necessary supports to be funded. The Tribunal concluded that the statement of participant supports is an integral part of the plan, and it is the decision to approve this statement within the plan that is the reviewable decision. As the request for travel costs was not part of an internal review decision concerning the approval of the statement of participant supports, the Tribunal found it lacked jurisdiction to review this specific request.
The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed jurisdiction to review the Applicant's request for travel costs. This required an examination of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (NDIS Act) and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (AAT Act) to determine which decisions were reviewable by the Tribunal. Specifically, the Tribunal had to ascertain if the request for travel costs fell within the scope of decisions that could be reviewed under the NDIS Act.
The Tribunal reasoned that the jurisdiction of the AAT to review decisions under the NDIS Act is conferred by the NDIS Act itself. Section 99 of the NDIS Act lists the decisions that are reviewable, and for the purposes of this case, the relevant decision was the approval of the statement of participant supports within a participant's plan, as provided by section 99(1) item 4. The Tribunal noted that a participant's plan, prepared under section 32, must include a statement of participant supports under section 33(2). This statement specifies the general supports and the reasonable and necessary supports to be funded. The Tribunal concluded that the statement of participant supports is an integral part of the plan, and it is the decision to approve this statement within the plan that is the reviewable decision. As the request for travel costs was not part of an internal review decision concerning the approval of the statement of participant supports, the Tribunal found it lacked jurisdiction to review this specific request.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Judicial Review
-
Statutory Construction
-
Appeal
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Collins and National Disability Insurance Agency [2021] AATA 3245
Cases Citing This Decision
2
Oczenaschek and National Disability Insurance Agency
[2021] AATA 3511
Collins and National Disability Insurance Agency
[2021] AATA 3245
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
0
National Disability Insurance Agency v WRMF
[2020] FCAFC 79
National Disability Insurance Agency v WRMF
[2020] FCAFC 79
Shi v Migration Agents Registration Authority
[2008] HCA 31