Dorrington and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application for review of an internal review decision made by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) concerning a participant's statement of supports. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) had remitted the NDIA's decision for reconsideration. The dispute arose because the reconsideration decision, which was expressed within a participant plan document, lacked explicit reasons, did not reference the materials upon which its findings were based, and did not expressly consider temporal factors.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the deficiencies in the NDIA's reconsideration decision were sufficient to negate the decision itself, and consequently, whether the Tribunal retained jurisdiction to review the original internal review decision as it was purportedly varied by the reconsideration. This involved an interpretation of section 42D of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), which governs the Tribunal's power to remit decisions for reconsideration.

The Tribunal reasoned that while section 42D(7) requires a decision-maker to both reconsider a decision and take one of the actions specified in section 42D(2) within the prescribed period, the word "and" in section 42D(7) is crucial. It mandates a conjunctive requirement: reconsideration must occur, and one of the specified actions must be taken. The Tribunal found that the deficiencies identified in the NDIA's reconsideration decision, although noted, did not prevent the decision from being taken to have been varied. Therefore, the application for review was taken to be an application for review of the decision as varied by the reconsideration, and the Tribunal retained jurisdiction.