JRGL and National Disability Insurance Agency

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the dispute between JRGL, a participant in the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) regarding a review of JRGL's statement of participant supports. JRGL sought funding for an iPad and keyboard, which the NDIA had declined.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the requested iPad and keyboard constituted "reasonable and necessary supports" for JRGL under section 34(1) of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth). This required the Tribunal to assess the requested items against the cumulative criteria set out in section 34(1)(a) to (f) of the Act, as elaborated in the Support Rules.

The Tribunal applied the principles established in cases such as *McGarrigle v National Disability Insurance Agency* and *National Disability Insurance Agency v WRMF*. It noted that "support" refers to practical assistance for a person with a disability. The assessment of whether a support is "reasonable" and "necessary" involves considering different factors, with necessity often relating to the impact of the disability and the need for participation, while reasonableness addresses factors like cost-effectiveness and suitability. The Tribunal also emphasised that the phrase "reasonable and necessary supports" links to the expenditure of public funds and requires supports to meet a threshold justifying such expenditure, considering the Act's objects, principles, and the participant's circumstances and goals.

Ultimately, the Tribunal found that while some criteria under section 34(1) were met, specifically (a), (b), and (d), the requested supports failed to satisfy criteria (c), (e), and (f). As all six criteria must be met for a support to be deemed reasonable and necessary, the Tribunal concluded that the iPad and keyboard were not most appropriately funded or provided through the NDIS. Consequently, the decision under review, which affirmed the NDIA's refusal, was upheld.