HDCZ and National Disability Insurance Agency

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application by HDCZ (the Applicant) concerning a summons issued to the National Disability Insurance Agency (the Respondent). The dispute arose from the Applicant's request for certain documents from the Respondent, which led to the issuance of a summons by the Tribunal. The Applicant sought a finding that the Respondent had failed to comply with this summons.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the summons, which had been issued to the Respondent's legal representative, was an appropriate exercise of the Tribunal's power under section 40A of the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975* (Cth) and whether it should be set aside. The Tribunal also considered the Applicant's contention that the Respondent had not complied with the summons.

The Tribunal reasoned that while it possessed the power to issue summonses, the principles applicable to court-issued subpoenas were relevant. It noted that the summons effectively sought documents from the Respondent, a party to the proceedings, rather than documents personally held by its legal representative. The Tribunal expressed concern that its power to summon might not be the most appropriate mechanism for obtaining documents from a party, especially if the information was publicly accessible, suggesting that section 37 of the AAT Act, which allows for directions to parties, might be a more suitable avenue. After considering submissions from both parties, including the Applicant's assertion that the Respondent was withholding information, the Tribunal was not satisfied that this was the case.

Consequently, the Tribunal ordered that the summons issued on 17 January 2022 be set aside. As a result of this decision, the Respondent was no longer required to comply with the summons, and the Tribunal did not make a finding that the Respondent had failed to comply with it.