Need help with a Tribunal matter? Start here.

-

 Getting help with a matter in the AAT

I have received a number of inquiries from people who have either started proceedings in the Tribunal concerning a dispute with the NDIS, or who are about to start proceedings. This can be a stressful and challenging process, particularly if a person doesn't have legal advice or assistance. However, there are a number of possible avenues for legal assistance or advocacy. I set some of these out below:

Legal Aid

Legal aid is available for Tribunal disputes. Each state has its own Legal Aid system, and that means that there are different criteria that have to be met in order to obtain Legal Aid. 

The Department of Social Services has prepared guidelines [opens in new window] for each of the Legal Aid agencies to follow in deciding whether to grant legal aid funding for an NDIS dispute. In summary:
  • An applicant has to lodge an application with the AAT before applying for legal aid.
  • Funding applications are not subject to means testing and no contribution for legal services is recoverable. 
  • In order for funding to be provided, Legal Aid has to be satisfied that:
    • There is a significant likelihood that legal representation would lead to wider community benefit, for example a question of law will be resolved, or the decisions will affect a large number of NDIS participants;
    • The applicant is suffering disadvantage, and would likely realise a substantial benefit from legal representation; and
    • The matter meets a merits test.
This website [opens in new window] provides contact information for Legal Aid in each state.

Community Legal Centres

Community Legal Centres provide free legal advice and assistance to people in their area. Some Community Legal Centres provide legal assistance or advice in relation to NDIS matters in the AAT. However, whether they are able to provide assistance will depend on the Centre's policies and the resources available to it. For instance, they might only be able to provide assistance to people with low income and assets. They might also only be able to provide a limited amount of assistance. Each Centre will have its own policies in this regard.

This website [opens in new window] allows you to search for a Community Legal Centre in your area.

Public Interest Advocacy Centre

PIAC seeks to change laws, policies and practices that cause inequality. One way in which PIAC does this is to represent people in legal matters, including NDIS matters, that are of public interest (that is, resolution of the issues in the case is likely to benefit a large number of people). Not every NDIS matter has a public interest dimension.

PIAC's ability to take on cases is dependent on their workload. Not every person who has a good case will be able to be assisted by them.

You are able to contact PIAC via the information on this website [opens in new window].

Disability Advocacy Centres

There are a number of disability advocacy centres that provide assistance to people with disability in Tribunal disputes. The people that work at these centres are often trained advocates with experience in this area of law, but they might not be solicitors. 

There are centres that focus on advocacy for people with any kind of disability, and other centres that focus on the needs of people with specific types of disability e.g. intellectual disability. 

Again, their resources are likely to be limited, and unfortunately they will likely not be able to help every person who needs it. 

The Disability Advocacy Network Australia [opens in new window] is a good place to start to find an advocacy centre. 

Pro bono referral schemes

The Law Societies in most states have a system for referring people who need legal help to solicitors who are willing to do the work pro bono (for free). Not every solicitor is able or willing to do pro bono work, and not all solicitors will practice in this area. 

Once a solicitor is in place, it might be possible for the solicitor to brief a barrister who is also willing to accept the brief pro bono. 

Each state has its own law society, so you should Google the name of your state and the words "law society pro bono". 

Comments

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