Koutroumanis and Decision Maker

This matter concerned an application brought by Mr Koutroumanis seeking review of decisions made by Victorian State agencies. The applicant had two primary grievances: firstly, that certain injuries sustained in a 1976 crash were not found to be compensable due to incomplete medical records, and secondly, a 2022 refusal by an agency to provide documents requested under freedom of information legislation. The application was heard by D. J. Morris SM of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed the jurisdiction to review decisions made by State agencies under Victorian legislation. The Tribunal was required to determine if its powers, as defined by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), extended to such matters, or if the applicant had been misdirected to the wrong forum.

The Tribunal reasoned that its power to review decisions is derived from Commonwealth enactments, as defined by section 3 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth). It noted that the decisions Mr Koutroumanis sought to review were made by Victorian State agencies acting under State legislation. The Tribunal acknowledged that the applicant had been misled by correspondence advising him to seek review by the "Administrative Appeals Tribunal," which referred to the now-abolished Victorian State tribunal of the same name, rather than the Commonwealth tribunal. The Tribunal clarified that the current administrative review tribunal for decisions under Victorian Acts is the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).

Consequently, the Tribunal found that it lacked jurisdiction to review the decisions in question, as they were made under State law. The application was therefore dismissed. The Tribunal indicated that the appropriate pathway for the applicant to pursue review of these matters would be through VCAT or the Victorian Courts, and noted that an extension of time might be necessary given the age of the decisions.