McPherson and National Disability Insurance Agency

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered a dispute between Mr McPherson (the Applicant) and the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) regarding the NDIA's refusal to fund a defibrillator as a reasonable and necessary support under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). The Applicant, who suffers from a severe medical condition resulting in an inability to swallow or clear saliva, leading to a high risk of choking and unconsciousness, sought funding for a defibrillator to be available at his home.

The central legal issue before the AAT was whether a defibrillator constituted a "reasonable and necessary support" that could be funded under the NDIS. This required the Tribunal to interpret and apply specific provisions of the *National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013* (Cth), particularly sections 33(5), 34(1), and 35(1), which outline the criteria for approving participant supports and defining what constitutes reasonable and necessary supports.

The Tribunal reasoned that section 35(1)(b) of the NDIS Act permits the creation of rules prescribing supports that will not be funded. In this instance, a defibrillator was considered an excluded support under these rules. Consequently, the Tribunal found that no further consideration under section 34(1)(f) of the Act, which deals with whether a support is most appropriately funded through the NDIS, was necessary.

Accordingly, the AAT affirmed the NDIA's decision of 3 July 2020, which refused Mr McPherson's request for funding for a defibrillator machine.