Kuchlmayr and Australian Capital Territory (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Kuchlmayr for review of a decision by the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) to decline her request for a reconsideration of a previous decision by its own motion. The original claim for compensation arose from an alleged psychological ailment Ms Kuchlmayr suffered due to bullying in her employment. Initially, Comcare accepted liability, but a subsequent reconsideration decision on 12 October 2017 overturned this, finding no entitlement to compensation. This reconsideration decision was affirmed by a consent decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) on 21 June 2018, following an agreement between Ms Kuchlmayr and Comcare.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed jurisdiction to review the ACT's refusal to reconsider the 12 October 2017 decision by its own motion. Subsidiary questions concerned whether Ms Kuchlmayr's application was out of time and, if so, whether it was reasonable to grant an extension. The ACT had declined the request for reconsideration on 29 November 2021, stating that the claim had been determined, reviewed, and affirmed by the AAT, and that the appeal to review the AAT decision had been dismissed.

The Member determined that the ACT's decision to decline an invitation to reconsider a previous reconsideration decision by its own motion was not a reviewable decision. The Tribunal had previously dismissed an application to review the consent decision on the grounds that it was final and the Tribunal had already exercised its powers of review, rendering it *functus officio*. The subsequent request to the ACT for reconsideration by its own motion, and the ACT's refusal of that request, did not create a new reviewable decision. Consequently, the Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to entertain the application.

The application was therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.