Introduction

-

The purpose of this blog is to provide short reviews and commentaries about cases concerning the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). This blog will try to clearly summarise them , so that they become a useful source of information to people that may need to interact with the NDIS.

 The NDIS is one of the most essential forms of support to people with disability in Australia. There are almost 200,000 Australians [opens on new page] receiving support through the NDIS, and the continuing rollout will result in this number growing rapidly.

People with disability, their families and carers face a number of competing demands on their time and resources. On top of this the NDIS can be confusing and bureaucratic. The National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) has to give due consideration to the need to ensure the financial stability of the NDIS - National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth) s 3(3)(b) [opens on new page]. That may mean that a person does not get all of the help that they want, or feel that they need, and this may lead to conflict.

As the number of people receiving support via the NDIS increases, so will the number of disputes between those people and the NDIA increase. Some of these disputes will be decided by the Administrative Appeal Tribunal (AAT) and the Federal Court of Australia (FCA). Those decisions give the community guidance about how the NDIS works.

The blog is not intended to be a complete one stop shop for information about the NDIS. Importantly, the information on this blog is intended only to provide a summary and overview of cases. It is not intended to be comprehensive, and it does not constitute legal advice. You should seek legal or professional advice before acting or relying on anything published on this blog.


Comments

  1. Julia31 August 2022 at 17:40

    Hi Matthew Thankyou for your great summary of AAT NDIS cases. I am a disability NDIS Appeals Advocate and these summaries are gold :)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Multiple Sclerosis and funding for air conditioning - McKenzie and NDIA

-
Key Points In McKenzie and NDIA [2019] AATA 3275  [opens in new window] the Tribunal determined that replacement of a home air conditioning system was a reasonable and necessary support for a person whose multiple sclerosis ( MS ) worsened in high temperatures or when the temperature changed. This is a useful decision because it emphasises that social and economic participation for the purposes of s 34 of the NDIS Act can still take place even in one's own home.  The decision also emphasises that whether something represents day-to-day spending that the NDIS will not cover, or a disability support that the NDIS will cover depends on the nature of the disability and its effects on the person. What is a discretionary item for a person without a disability may not be a discretionary item for a person with disability. Facts Mr McKenzie lives in far north Queensland. He has MS. The symptoms of his conditions worsen when his core body temperature rises and when he is expos
Read more

Permanence - NDIA v Davis [2022] FCA 1002

-
Key Points In NDIA v Davis [2022] FCA 1002 [opens in new window], the Federal Court has interpreted the NDIS Rules in a way that requires the NDIA and the Tribunal to take into account, among other things, a participant’s financial circumstances in determining whether a treatment is ‘available’. This is part of the NDIS Rules that deal with ‘permanence’. Facts Ms Davis suffers from a number of conditions, including spondylarthrosis, degenerative impingement of both shoulders, bilateral knee osteoarthritis, ulcerative colitis, obstructive sleep apnoea and morbid obesity. She applied to become a participant in the NDIA. The NDIA declined her application, finding that she did not meet the disability requirements under s 24 of the NDIS Act [opens in new window]. Ms Davis sought review of this decision in the Tribunal. On 14 January 2022, the Tribunal decided to set aside the NDIA’s decision and find that Ms Davis should be admitted as a participant: [2022] AATA 40 [opens in new
Read more

Morbid obesity - is it an 'impairment' for the NDIS?

-
Note 14 November 2022:   The decision in Schwass v NDIA has likely been affected by the Federal Court's reasoning in NDIA v Davis  [2022] FCA 202 - please treat the decision in Schwass  carefully. The below blog article considers the law as it was understood in 2019. Key points There is a conflict between two Tribunal decisions about whether morbid obesity is an 'impairment' for the NDIS - 'impairment' is one of the access criteria for the NDIS. The conflict between the two decisions would have to be resolved by the Federal Court in an appropriate case. Even if a person with morbid obesity could prove it was an 'impairment', it will likely be difficult for them to prove that it was a 'permanent' impairment, because this would require them to show that there is no medical or other treatment available for it. Introduction The Tribunal has two different views on the question of whether morbid obesity is capable of being an 'impairment
Read more