SWBT and CEO, National Disability Insurance Agency (Practice and procedure) - [2025] ARTA 1240

SWBT and CEO, National Disability Insurance Agency (Practice and procedure) [2025] ARTA 1240 (1 August 2025)
Applicant/s:  SWBT
Respondent:  CEO, National Disability Insurance Agency
Tribunal Number:                2025/0692

Tribunal:General Member L Proske
Place:Adelaide
Date:1 August 2025

Decision:The application is dismissed pursuant to s 99 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024

Statement made on 01 August 2025 at 11:19am
Catchwords
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – applicant failed to appear at directions hearing – appropriate notice of the directions hearing given to the applicant – application for review dismissed pursuant to s 99 of the ART Act
Legislation
Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (ART Act)
Statement of Reasons

The applicant (SWBT) is 12 years old. SWBT’s mother (Ms SWBT) made an application to the Tribunal on SWBT’s behalf on 2 February 2025 regarding a decision made by the CEO of the National Disability Insurance Agency (Respondent) on 17 January 2025 that SWBT did not meet the access criteria to become a participant of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).
On the review application form, Ms SWBT was recorded as SWBT’s representative; Ms SWBT’s email address was provided; and email was identified as Ms SWBT’s preferred method of correspondence.
Section 99 of the ART Act provides that if the applicant fails to appear at a Tribunal case event that relates to a proceeding in relation to an application; and the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant received appropriate notice of the date, time and place of the Tribunal case event; the Tribunal may dismiss the application. An applicant may appear at Tribunal case events themselves, or through a representative.[1] Tribunal case events include hearings, directions hearings and dispute resolution processes.[2]
[1] Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (ART Act), s 73.
[2] ART Act, s 4.
In circumstances where SWBT is only 12 years old, SWBT is reliant on Ms SWBT as her representative, or on any other representative Ms SWBT may appoint with respect to this application, to appear at Tribunal case events and to generally progress this application.
Four Tribunal case events have been listed in relation to this proceeding. The first 2 Tribunal case events – case conferences listed on 1 April 2025 and 20 May 2025 – were dispute resolution processes. Both of those case conferences were vacated at Ms SWBT’s request.
The Tribunal emailed Ms SWBT a listing notice on 21 May 2025 which advised a case conference would take place by telephone on 27 June 2025 at 12:30PM (QLD time). That listing notice cautioned that if an applicant, or an applicant’s representative, failed to appear at the case conference, the Tribunal may dismiss the application under s 99 of the ART Act. Ms SWBT failed to appear at the case conference on 27 June 2025. On this occasion, the Tribunal did not exercise the discretion in s 99 of the ART Act to dismiss the application. Instead, noting the matter had made no progress through dispute resolution processes, it was decided the matter would be listed for a directions hearing by telephone.
The Tribunal emailed Ms SWBT a listing notice on 1 July 2025 which advised a directions hearing by telephone would take place on 30 July 2025 at 12:30PM (QLD time). That listing notice cautioned that if an applicant, or an applicant’s representative, failed to appear at the directions hearing by telephone, the Tribunal may dismiss the application under s 99 of the ART Act.
The Tribunal received several emails from Ms SWBT, and from another individual (Ms X), in response to the listing notice referred to in paragraph [6]. Those emails made several contentions regarding the Tribunal’s jurisdiction and procedure, and the Respondent’s conduct in this proceeding. They also stated Ms SWBT would not participate in the scheduled directions hearing due to alleged legal, ethical and jurisdictional breaches. It was broadly submitted the directions hearing by telephone on 30 July 2025 should proceed in the absence of both parties; the Respondent should be removed as a party to the proceeding; and the Tribunal should make its decision without holding a hearing.
The Tribunal considered the emails referred to in paragraph [8], including the circumstances of SWBT and Ms SWBT described therein. The Tribunal determined the directions hearing on 30 July 2025 was necessary to address issues raised in those emails, and to progress the application. The Tribunal emailed Ms SWBT on 18 July 2025, in her capacity as SWBT’s representative, to confirm that the directions hearing by telephone on 30 July 2025 would proceed as scheduled; and cautioned that if an applicant or an applicant’s representative failed to appear at that directions hearing, the Tribunal may dismiss the application under s 99 of the ART Act.
The directions hearing by telephone on 30 July 2025 commenced at 12:30PM (QLD time), as scheduled. The Tribunal telephoned Ms SWBT three times, in her capacity as SWBT’s representative, with pauses between each attempt. Ms SWBT did not answer any of those calls, and her phone diverted to voicemail on each occasion. Neither Ms SWBT nor Ms X have provided the Tribunal with a telephone number for Ms X.
In the circumstances as outlined above, the Tribunal is satisfied SWBT received appropriate notice of the date, time and place of the directions hearing by telephone on 30 July 2025 at 12:30PM (QLD time); and finds SWBT failed to appear through a representative at that Tribunal case event. The Tribunal may therefore dismiss this application.
The Tribunal has considered that this matter involves a 12-year-old child and relates to a decision that SWBT did not meet the criteria to be granted access to the NDIS. The Tribunal has also considered information provided in the emails referred to in paragraph [8] regarding SWBT’s and Ms SWBT’s circumstances.
However, this application has now been before the Tribunal for 6 months. In that time, 2 Tribunal case events have been vacated at Ms SWBT’s request, and Ms SWBT has failed to appear at 2 Tribunal case events. With respect to the directions hearing by telephone on 30 July 2025, Ms SWBT expressly refused to appear despite the Tribunal confirming that Tribunal case event would proceed as scheduled, and cautioning in both the listing notice and an email dated 18 July 2025 that the Tribunal may dismiss the application if SWBT’s representative failed to appear.
In the circumstances as outlined above, and noting the Tribunal’s objectives as outlined in s 9 of the ART Act, the Tribunal dismisses the application pursuant to s 99 of the ART Act.
DECISION
The application is dismissed pursuant to s 99 of the ART Act.