LQMG and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application for review before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) by LQMG against a decision of the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). The core of the dispute revolved around the procedural pathway available to ensure that applications for review of a participant's plans, made in different years, were heard concurrently, particularly when the NDIA had not yet reviewed an earlier plan but had reviewed a later one.

The AAT was required to determine the legal implications of section 103 of the *National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013* (NDIS Act), which permits applications to the AAT for review of decisions made by a reviewer under section 100(6) of that Act. Crucially, the Tribunal also had to consider the interplay between the NDIS Act and the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975* (AAT Act), specifically section 25(5) of the AAT Act, which deems a failure by a decision-maker to meet a deadline as a decision not to do the act within the prescribed period. The Tribunal also had to consider the requirements for lodging an application for review under section 29 of the AAT Act, including the prescribed timeframes for doing so.

The Deputy President, S A Forgie P, noted that section 103 of the NDIS Act provides the avenue for review. The decision then explored the application of section 25(5) of the AAT Act, which deems a failure to act within a prescribed period as a decision not to act. This provision is significant when a reviewer has not yet made a decision. The Tribunal also detailed the requirements for lodging an application under section 29 of the AAT Act, including the prescribed timeframes which depend on whether the decision sets out findings of fact and reasons, and how the decision document is provided to the applicant. The decision did not provide a final outcome but rather set out the context and relevant legal provisions for the deliberation on the question posed in the heading.