FVCS and CEO, National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIS) - [2025] ARTA 2183

FVCS and CEO, National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIS) [2025] ARTA 2183 (2 October 2025)

Applicant/s:  FVCS
Respondent:  CEO, National Disability Insurance Agency
Tribunal Number:                2024/4394
Tribunal:General Member D Heron
Place:Brisbane
Date:2 October 2025

Decision: The Tribunal affirms the decision under review pursuant to section 105(a) of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act2024 (Cth).

………………………………..

General Member D Heron

Catchwords

National Disability Insurance Scheme – reviewable decision of Chief Executive Officer – Statement of Participant Supports – NDIS support – plan management – power wheelchair – assistance animal – reviewable decisions – decision affirmed.

Legislation

Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024
National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth)
National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Act 2024
National Disability Insurance Scheme (Supports for Participants) Rules 2013 (Cth)
National Disability Insurance Scheme (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) (NDIS Supports) Transitional Rules 2024
National Disability Insurance Scheme (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) (Miscellaneous Provisions) Transitional Rules 2024

National Disability Insurance Scheme (Plan Management) Rules 2013 (Cth)

Cases

Drake and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (No. 2) 1979 2 ALD 634

McGarrigle v National Disability Insurance Agency [2017] FCA 308

National Disability Insurance Agency v WRMF [2020] FCAFC 79

Secondary Materials

NDIS Operational Guidelines - Reasonable and Necessary Supports, dated 28 March 2025.

NDIS Operational Guidelines – Assistive Technology dated 20 December 2023.

NDIS Operational Guidelines – Assistance Animals including dog guides dated 27 March 2025.

Statement of Reasons

Introduction

This is a review of a decision by a delegate of the CEO of the National Disability Insurance Agency (the Respondent) not to approve various supports in FVCS (the Applicant) Statement of Participant Supports.
FVCS is 47 years of age, and she has been a National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) participant since meeting the eligibility criteria for access on the 10^thof July 2018. FVCS lives with her adult son who is also an NDIS participant. FVCS met access to the NDIS for her permanent impairments attributable to her diagnoses of Ankylosing Spondylitis and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder.

The decision under review

A decision to approve a Statement of Participant Supports is a reviewable decision.[1] On 4 March 2024, a delegate of the CEO of the NDIS made a decision to approve FVCS’s Statement of Participant Supports (SOPS) under s33(2) of the NDIS Act. FVCS was dissatisfied with this decision and requested an internal review pursuant to s100(2) of the NDIS Act on 18 March 2024. On 31 May 2024, a different delegate of the CEO of the NDIS confirmed the original decision.
[1] Item 4 and 6 of section 99 of the NDIS Act.
FVCS filed an application for external review with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the AAT) on 28 June 2024. The AAT was abolished on 13 October 2024, and the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) began on the 14 October 2024. By virtue of the transitional arrangements, FVCS’s application for review was automatically transferred…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading FVCS and CEO, National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIS)

Details

AGLC: FVCS and CEO, National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIS) [2025] ARTA 2183
Case: [2025] ARTA 2183
Decision Date: 2 October 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of FVCS and CEO, National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIS), the dispute centred on the review of a decision made by the Chief Executive Officer regarding the provision of certain supports under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). The applicant, FVCS, sought a review of the decision which involved the refusal of funding for a power wheelchair and an assistance animal. The case was heard and determined by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the Chief Executive Officer's decision was legally sound and whether it was based on proper consideration of the relevant legislative provisions and guidelines. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the decision to deny funding for the power wheelchair and the assistance animal was reasonable and in line with the NDIS Act and associated regulations. The applicant argued that the refusal to fund these supports was unjust and contrary to the intended purpose of the NDIS to provide reasonable and necessary supports.

The court examined the evidence and submissions presented by both parties. It found that the Chief Executive Officer had correctly interpreted and applied the relevant legislative framework in making the decision. The court held that the decision was not flawed and was based on a comprehensive assessment of the participant's needs and the available funding. The applicant's arguments did not successfully challenge the reasoning or the outcome of the decision. Consequently, the court affirmed the Chief Executive Officer's decision.

The final orders of the court affirmed the decision of the Chief Executive Officer, upholding the refusal to fund the power wheelchair and the assistance animal under the NDIS. The applicant's application for review was dismissed, and no further action was permitted on the matter unless an appeal was lodged within the specified timeframe.

Orders