Sheward and National Disability Insurance Agency

This matter concerned an interlocutory decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) in a proceeding between Sheward and the National Disability Insurance Agency. The dispute arose from an objection made by the National Disability Insurance Agency to the AAT's direction that expert witnesses for both parties should give their evidence concurrently.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the AAT's direction for concurrent evidence from expert witnesses should stand, despite the objection raised by the National Disability Insurance Agency. This involved considering the AAT's General Practice Directions and its Use of Concurrent Evidence Guideline, and how these provisions applied to the specific circumstances of the case, including concerns raised about potential conflicts of interest concerning expert witnesses.

The Tribunal reasoned that its General Practice Directions and the Concurrent Evidence Guideline indicated a clear expectation that expert witnesses traversing the same evidentiary territory would give evidence concurrently, unless otherwise directed. The Tribunal found that the submissions of the National Disability Insurance Agency were not persuasive in overcoming this default position. It noted that concerns regarding bias or conflict of interest in expert evidence were matters that went to the weight of that evidence, rather than precluding its admission or the procedure for its presentation. The Tribunal also observed that it was not bound by the strict rules of evidence applicable in courts, but that considerations of credibility were relevant.

Accordingly, the Tribunal determined that its previous directions, requiring the concurrent witnesses to prepare and file a joint statement by a specified date, would stand. A further directions hearing was to be held after the receipt of this joint statement to discuss the manner in which the expert evidence would be presented at the substantive hearing.