Mills and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an application by Ms Mills to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for review of decisions made by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). The dispute arose from Ms Mills' request to change her plan management from plan-managed to self-managed, which the NDIA failed to determine within the statutory timeframe, resulting in a deemed refusal. Ms Mills also sought to have funding for an e-bike considered, a support she had only begun to contemplate after the original plan decision.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether it had jurisdiction to review the deemed refusal decision, and whether it could consider the provision of an e-bike as a support, even though this had not been raised at the time of the original plan decision. The Tribunal was required to determine the scope of its merits review function, particularly in relation to deemed decisions and the consideration of supports not initially requested.

The Tribunal reasoned that its merits review function requires it to stand in the shoes of the original decision-maker and determine the decision afresh, considering all matters that could have been before the original decision-maker. Drawing on High Court authority, the Tribunal held that it was not limited to the specific supports requested by the applicant and could consider the issue of plan management and the provision of an e-bike. The Tribunal found that the decision of 22 February 2024, which the NDIA argued was not a reviewable decision, was in fact a decision not to vary Ms Mills' plan under subsection 47A(4)(b) of the NDIS Act, and therefore constituted a reviewable decision. The Tribunal also noted that the NDIA had acknowledged making significant errors in Ms Mills' case.

The Tribunal concluded that it had jurisdiction to review the matter. The Tribunal expressed the view that it had jurisdiction to review the decision of 22 February 2024 as a decision not to vary Ms Mills’ plan under s 47A(4)(b), which is a reviewable decision. The Tribunal granted the Respondent time to make further submissions regarding the interpretation of a 'minor variation' under s 47A(1A)(d)(iv) of the NDIS Act.