Hayes and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application by Mr Hayes for review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of a decision made by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). The dispute centred on whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the NDIA's decision to approve the statement of supports in Mr Hayes' participant plan, specifically whether an internal review had been conducted in accordance with the *National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013* (Cth).

The Tribunal was required to determine whether a decision apparently made under subsection 33(2) of the Act was the outcome of a valid internal review request made under section 100 of the Act. This involved considering whether the NDIA had conducted an internal review in accordance with the statutory requirements and whether Mr Hayes had made a valid request for such a review. The core legal issue was whether the decision under review was one that the Tribunal was empowered to hear and determine pursuant to section 103 of the Act.

The Tribunal reasoned that section 99 of the Act identifies which decisions are reviewable by the Tribunal, including decisions under subsection 33(2) to approve a statement of participant supports. Section 100 mandates that the NDIA must provide written notice of a reviewable decision, informing the affected person of their rights to an internal review by the NDIA and a subsequent review by the Tribunal. A request for internal review, which can be made orally or in writing without specific wording, triggers a mandatory review by a delegate not involved in the original decision. The reviewer must then confirm, vary, or set aside the decision. Applications to the Tribunal are for review of decisions made by a reviewer under section 100(6). In this instance, the letter from the NDIA to Mr Hayes, while advising of the plan approval and its commencement date, also contained information about how to request a review if he disagreed with the plan approval decision. However, the Tribunal found that this information did not constitute a request for internal review by Mr Hayes, nor did it demonstrate that an internal review had been conducted.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to review the decision as it was not a decision made by a reviewer under section 100(6). The application for review was therefore dismissed pursuant to subsection 42A(4) of the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975* (Cth).