Dyne and National Disability Insurance Agency

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered a jurisdictional issue raised by the Applicant, Dyne, in relation to a decision made by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). The Applicant's representative had raised concerns regarding the NDIA's processes and conduct, which were the subject of the AAT's consideration.

The central legal issue before the AAT was whether it possessed jurisdiction to review the NDIA's decision to approve a statement of participant supports in the Applicant's plan, which commenced on 7 June 2024. This required the AAT to determine if the preconditions for its review under the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth) had been met.

The AAT reasoned that its jurisdiction to review decisions under the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth) is established by section 103, which permits review of decisions made by an NDIA reviewer under subsection 100(6). Subsection 100(6) outlines the possible outcomes of an NDIA review: confirming, varying, or setting aside and substituting a decision. The AAT noted that a decision to approve a statement of participant supports is a 'reviewable decision' under section 99. Crucially, the AAT found that it could not review the NDIA's planning decision until either an NDIA reviewer had completed a review under subsection 100(6), or the 90-day timeframe for such a review (which would conclude on 9 September 2024) had expired without a decision. The AAT concluded that, as no review decision under subsection 100(6) had yet been made, it lacked jurisdiction to review the NDIA's planning decision. The AAT advised that if the Applicant remained unsatisfied with the outcome of the NDIA review or the NDIA's failure to decide within the timeframe, an appeal could then be lodged with the AAT. Concerns about the NDIA's conduct or communication should be raised as a complaint with the NDIA, with further recourse to the Commonwealth Ombudsman if unsatisfied with the complaint outcome.