Mohebati-Arani and National Disability Insurance Agency

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mohebati-Arani and the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA). The dispute concerned the Applicant's ability to self-manage his National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) funding, with the NDIA having determined that his plan should be agency-managed due to concerns about his capacity to manage funds safely. The Applicant contended that this decision limited his choice and control over his supports.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Applicant could safely manage his NDIS funding in his own best interests without undue risk. This involved assessing his capacity to exercise choice and control in the pursuit of his goals and the planning and delivery of his supports, as mandated by the objectives and principles of the NDIS Act. The core issue was whether the Applicant's significant cognitive and neurophysiological impairments, resulting from a traumatic brain injury, rendered him incapable of effectively managing his financial and administrative responsibilities associated with a self-managed plan.

The Tribunal's reasoning was heavily influenced by expert clinical evidence, including a neuropsychologist's report, which concluded that the Applicant lacked the necessary cognitive functions to comprehend complex documents or thoroughly evaluate financial information. This was corroborated by evidence of past irrational and impulsive financial decisions, including significant monetary losses. The Tribunal accepted the NDIA's evidence that the Applicant's initial self-managed plan funds were exhausted within three months and that he had previously spent money on services not stipulated in his support plans. Despite acknowledging the importance of choice and control under the NDIS Act, the Tribunal found that the Applicant's cognitive impairments demonstrated a significant limitation in his capacity for effective financial and administrative control, making him vulnerable to financial harm.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the NDIA's decision to require the Applicant's supports to be agency-managed. The Tribunal concluded that the Applicant's significant impairments prevented him from meeting the requirements for self-management of his supports and that the criteria for requiring agency-management were met in this case.