Download (right click) the
AAT Annual Report
2016–17 (Adobe PDF | 3.7 MB).

Note: You will need Adobe Reader to view this file.

Download Adobe Reader

Download (right click) the
AAT Annual Report
2016–17 (RTF | 164 MB).

Note: This version is compatible with Microsft Word and other text readers.

Chapter 3 – Our performance

Annual Performance Statement

Introductory statement

I, Sian Leathem, as the accountable authority of the AAT present the 2016–17 annual performance statement of the AAT, as required under paragraph 39(1)(a) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013. In my opinion, this annual performance statement is based on properly maintained records, accurately reflects the performance of the entity and complies with subsection 39(2) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act.

Our purpose

The role of the AAT is to provide independent review on the merits of a wide range of administrative decisions made under the laws of the Commonwealth of Australia and of Norfolk Island. Merits review of an administrative decision involves considering afresh the facts, law and policy relating to that decision. We decide what is the correct or preferable decision based on the material before us and may affirm, vary or set aside the decision under review.

The AAT’s objective is set out in section 2A of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act. In carrying out our functions, the AAT must pursue the objective of providing a mechanism of review of administrative decisions that:

• is accessible
• is fair, just, economical, informal and quick
• is proportionate to the importance and complexity of the matter, and
• promotes public trust and confidence in the decision-making of the Tribunal.

The AAT provides administrative justice for individuals and organisations seeking to challenge decisions that affect their interests and, more broadly, contributes to improving the quality of government decision-making.

Results

Analysis of performance against our purpose

The AAT operates in a dynamic environment. We are a demand-led organisation and do not control the type or volume of applications made to us which relate to decisions made across the spectrum of Australian Government activity. The number of applications lodged with the AAT grew by 24 per cent in 2016–17. While the largest increases were in the Migration and Refugee Division, lodgements also rose in many other areas of our work. There are constraints in our ability to easily adjust our resources to respond to changes in the caseload. In particular, the appointment of the members who hear and decide cases is a matter for government. Any newly appointed members also require time to develop their knowledge and capacity.

The AAT maintained a significant change program in 2016–17 arising from the amalgamation of the MRT, RRT and SSAT with the AAT on 1 July 2015 and our strategic priority of transforming the way we work. Key projects included trialling improvements in our case management approaches, the co-location of our offices across Australia, the integration of our registry services, the consolidation of our ICT infrastructure and work on our digital strategy. These projects required the engagement of members and staff across the AAT while we carried out our core function of reviewing decisions.

Within this operational context, we continued to provide a mechanism of review of administrative decisions in accordance with our statutory objective in 2016–17. The Tribunal’s efforts to operate more effectively and efficiently resulted in a substantial rise in the number of applications we finalised during the reporting year as well as an improvement in our timeliness. While we did not reach the target set out in our Corporate Plan in relation to finalisations and did not keep pace with the increase in lodgements, these matters were largely beyond our control. We exceeded our other performance targets relating to the timeliness and quality of our processes and decision-making. We also had in place a range of mechanisms to promote the accessibility of our services, including free access to interpreters. As a result of our work during 2016–17, a significant number of individuals and organisations were able to exercise their right to challenge administrative decisions, contributing to the accountability and transparency of government.

Financial performance

The 2016–17 financial statements for the AAT report total revenue from ordinary activities of $146.9 million and expenses of $150.1 million. When depreciation of $8.4 million is excluded, there was a surplus of
$5.2 million which was largely due to lower than anticipated operating costs, particularly in relation to the review of NDIS decisions and the operations of the Immigration Assessment Authority. We expect activity in relation to these jurisdictions to increase in 2017–18 and the forward years.

At 30 June 2017, the AAT was in a sound position in relation to net worth and liquidity, reporting net assets of $82.9 million, represented by assets of $148.0 million and liabilities of $65.1 million. We had unspent appropriations totalling $96.1 million of which $0.4 million was held in cash. Unspent appropriations are available to settle liabilities as and when they fall due and for future asset replacements and improvements.

We administered application fees on behalf of the government. Details of administered revenue are set out in the financial statements.

The financial statements for 2016–17, which commence on page 61, have been audited by the Australian National Audit Office.

The tables summarising our total resourcing and the total payments we made during the reporting period are in Appendix 3.

Caseload overview

The AAT received 51,426 applications and finalised 42,224 applications in 2016–17. There were 34,495 applications on hand at 30 June 2017.

Chart 3.1 illustrates the number of applications lodged and finalised in the last three financial years, and the number of applications on hand at 30 June in each year. The significant increase in our workload from the 2015–16 financial year reflects the amalgamation of the MRT, RRT and SSAT with the AAT from 1 July 2015.

The number of applications lodged with us in 2016–17 was 24 per cent higher than the 41,432 lodged in 2015–16. Finalisations in the reporting period rose by 11 per cent from the 38,146 applications finalised in 2015–16. The overall number of applications on hand at 30 June 2017 is 36 per cent higher than at 30 June 2016.

As shown in Chart 3.2, the size of our workload varies significantly between divisions: 52 per cent of lodgements during the reporting year were in the Migration and Refugee Division, 34 per cent in the Social Services and Child Support Division and 11 per cent in the General Division. Fewer than four per cent of lodgements were dealt with in the FOI, NDIS, Security, Taxation and Commercial, and Veterans’ Appeals Divisions.

We were able to keep pace with incoming applications in the Security Division and Taxation and Commercial Division which finalised the same or more than the number of applications lodged in the reporting period. Clearance rates were lower in the other divisions.

Of the 34,495 applications on hand at 30 June 2017, 71 per cent were applications in the Migration and Refugee Division, 13 per cent in the Social Services and Child Support Division and 11 per cent in the General Division. Applications in the FOI, NDIS, Security, Taxation and Commercial, and Veterans’ Appeals Divisions made up the remaining five per cent of current applications.

More detailed information about the operations of the AAT’s divisions is set out below. Information about the types of applications lodged and finalised in 2016–17 is also available in Appendix 4.

Applications made to us may be finalised in different ways as illustrated in Chart 3.3. In 2016–17, the majority of applications were finalised by the Tribunal making a decision on the review, generally after conducting a hearing but on the papers in certain circumstances. In six per cent of finalised cases, the reviewable decision was either affirmed, varied or set aside in accordance with an agreement reached between the parties. Almost 30 per cent of applications were withdrawn, finalised on the basis that they did not meet the requirements for a valid application or otherwise dismissed without the Tribunal reviewing the decision.

The Tribunal changed the decision under review in 26 per cent of all applications for review of a decision finalised in 2016–17. Further information on outcomes of reviews by division and major areas of work within certain divisions is available in Appendix 4.

^a ‘Dismissed by Tribunal’ includes applications dismissed by consent, for failure to appear before the Tribunal, for failure to proceed with an application or to comply with a direction of the AAT or on the basis that the application is frivolous, vexatious, misconceived, lacking in substance, has no reasonable prospect of success or is an abuse of the process of the AAT. ‘No jurisdiction’ includes applications finalised on the basis that the decision is not subject to review by the AAT, the applicant does not have standing to apply for a review, the application has not been made within a prescribed time limit, the AAT has refused to extend the time for applying for a review or the application fee has not been paid.

Operation of divisions

This section provides more information on the operations of the AAT’s eight divisions in 2016–17. As the largest of the divisions, the Migration and Refugee Division and Social Services and Child Support Division are dealt with separately. Our other divisions are discussed together.

Freedom of Information, General, National Disability Insurance Scheme, Security, Taxation and Commercial, and Veterans’ Appeals Divisions

The FOI, General, NDIS, Security, Taxation and Commercial, and Veterans’ Appeals Divisions deal with applications relating to a very broad range of reviewable decisions. Workload grew by six per cent in these divisions in the reporting year: 7,372 applications were lodged compared with 6,960 in 2015–16. Key statistics in relation to workload and timeliness for each of the divisions and major areas of work within divisions are set out in Table 3.4.

General Division

The General Division has the largest caseload of these divisions with two areas of work having the highest volume of applications: second review of Centrelink decisions and the review of decisions made under Commonwealth workers’ compensation legislation.

There was a three per cent increase in applications for second review of Centrelink decisions in 2016–17, consistent with a further rise in first review applications finalised by the Social Services and Child Support Division during the reporting year. Sixty per cent of applications related to disability support pension with applications relating to age pension, family tax benefit and newstart allowance making up a further 24 per cent
of lodgements. We maintained our timeliness in dealing with these applications. Liaison meetings were held with stakeholders during the year, including the Department of Human Services, legal aid commissions and community legal centres, to discuss case management practices and services provided for applicants.

Following the 20 per cent increase in 2015–16, lodgements in the workers’ compensation jurisdiction grew by a further seven per cent in 2016–17, primarily as a result of additional applications for review of decisions made under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 by Comcare and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission. While finalisations rose by 21 per cent in the reporting year, the growth in lodgements in recent years has led to a 14 per cent rise in the number of applications on hand at 30 June 2017. These cases are complex and a significant amount of investigation and evidence gathering, particularly in relation to medical evidence, takes place only after an application is lodged which can extend the review process. The proportion of applications finalised within 12 months in this reporting period was four percentage points lower than the 65 per cent result achieved in 2015–16. The caseload continues to be monitored and liaison undertaken with regular users to seek to ensure applications are being progressed as efficiently and effectively as possible.

The next largest volume of applications in the General Division were reviews of decisions about Australian citizenship and visa decisions relating to character. Lodgements relating to decisions about citizenship grew by 17 per cent in 2016–17 to 322. Of the 268 applications that were finalised, the decision under review was affirmed by the Tribunal in 19 per cent of cases and set aside in 23 per cent of cases. Approximately four-fifths of the cases in which the decision was set aside were finalised by consent in accordance with terms of agreement reached by the applicant and the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection with the remainder heard and determined by the Tribunal. Thirty-five per cent of applications were withdrawn while the balance were either not valid applications or otherwise dismissed by the Tribunal.

Table 3.4 Caseload overview, 2015–16 to 2016–17 – FOI, General, NDIS, Security, Taxation and Commercial, and Veterans’ Appeals Divisions

DIVISION/AREA OF WORK	LODGED		FINALISED		ON HAND AT YEAR END		% FINALISED WITHIN 12 MONTHS		MEDIAN TIME TO FINALISE (WEEKS)
	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17
Freedom of Information	37	44	57	37	60	66	81%	65%	34	38
General	5,460	5,798	4,764	5,414	3,556	3,909	84%	82%	22	24
Centrelink (2nd review)	2,463	2,532	2,314	2,456	1,224	1,272	92%	91%	20	21
Workers’ compensationa	1,797	1,919	1,373	1,659	1,756	2,003	65%	61%	41	42
Other	1,200	1,347	1,077	1,299	576	634	91%	91%	12	13
National Disability Insurance Scheme	48	215	33	89	27	151	97%	99%	17	9
Security	16	10	14	10	13	11	64%	80%	29	41
Taxation and Commercial	1,057	975	1,268	1,051	1,331	1,222	71%	74%	30	27
Taxation	921	854	1,136	920	1,251	1,152	68%	70%	32	29
Otherb	136	121	132	131	80	70	82%	87%	24	20
Veterans’ Appeals	342	330	365	308	333	354	66%	62%	40	43
TOTAL	6,960	7,372	6,501	6,909	5,320	5,713	79%	78%	26	26

^a These figures include applications for review of decisions about defence-related claims under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 which are formally allocated to the Veterans’ Appeals Division.

^b These figures include all non-taxation applications managed within the Taxation and Commercial Division whether or not formally allocated to that division: see the Review of Taxation and Commercial Decisions Practice Direction.

Applications for review of character-related visa decisions rose from 77 in 2015–16 to 183 in 2016–17. These were applications about:

• decisions to refuse or cancel a visa under section 501 of the Migration Act
• decisions under section 501CA of the Migration Act not to revoke a mandatory visa cancellation under section 501, and
• decisions to refuse or cancel a protection visa relying on sections 5H(2), 36(1C) or 36(2C)(a) or (b) of the Migration Act.

Forty-six per cent of these applications were required to be dealt with on an expedited basis and finalised within 12 weeks after the applicant was notified of the decision. These cases are prioritised over other types of reviews.

Of the 168 applications finalised in 2016–17, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review in 52 per cent of cases. The decision was set aside in 19 per cent of cases: three applications were finalised by consent in accordance with terms of agreement reached by the parties while the remainder were heard and determined by the Tribunal. Almost 30 per cent of applications were withdrawn, did not meet the requirements for a valid application or were otherwise dismissed.

Freedom of Information Division

The FOI Division deals with applications for review of decisions made under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 as well as decisions made under the Archives Act 1983 (except for those in respect of access to a record of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation) and the Privacy Act 1988. The number of applications lodged during the reporting year was marginally higher than in 2015–16 but the caseload remains low overall.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Division

With the commencement of the national rollout of the NDIS from 1 July 2016, the number of applications for review of decisions made under the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 is growing. There was a more than fourfold increase in lodgements in 2016–17, predominantly in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. Approximately three-quarters of applications related to plans made under the Scheme and, in particular, whether the funding for supports sought by a participant is reasonable and necessary. The remainder concerned whether a person is eligible to access the Scheme. Consistent with 2015–16, only a relatively small proportion of applications were finalised by way of a Tribunal decision following a hearing. The majority of applications were resolved during the pre-hearing process.

We engaged with stakeholders in this jurisdiction in various forums during the reporting year. We conducted liaison meetings with the disability advocacy service providers who provide support to applicants, legal aid commissions and the National Disability Insurance Agency. We also participated in the NDIS Appeals Advisory Group forums convened by the Department of Social Services.

Security Division

The Security Division deals with applications about security assessments made by ASIO under the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 and applications about decisions under the Archives Act in respect of access to an ASIO record. The number of applications dealt with by the Division remained low in 2016–17 with a small decrease in lodgements during the reporting year.

Taxation and Commercial Division

The Taxation and Commercial Division deals with applications for review of decisions of key regulators and other decision-makers, including the Australian Financial Security Authority, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, the Australian Taxation Office, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and the Tax Practitioners Board. Unlike most of the other divisions in which cases are managed during the pre-hearing process by AAT conference registrars, applications in this Division are generally allocated to a member who manages the case from lodgement to finalisation, working with the parties to tailor a strategy that will most effectively deal with the issues in dispute.

The number of applications for review of taxation decisions lodged in 2016–17 was eight per cent lower than the number lodged in 2015–16. This continues the trend from previous years which may be linked to the Australian Taxation Office’s use of processes that facilitate early resolution of disputes where possible. Lodgements in relation to commercial decisions were marginally lower in the reporting year. The Division achieved a three percentage point improvement in the proportion of applications finalised within 12 months with a corresponding decrease in the average time to resolution.

Veterans’ Appeals Division

The Veterans’ Appeals Division reviews a range of decisions made about benefits for current and former members of the Australian Defence Force and their families, including under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 and the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986. There was a slight decrease in lodgements in 2016–17 compared with the previous reporting year. While applications under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act remained steady, applications relating to the Veterans’ Entitlements Act declined in 2016–17. Similar to the workers’ compensation jurisdiction, the process of gathering additional evidence in many of these cases can extend the review process. The proportion of applications finalised within 12 months declined by four percentage points in 2016–17. Liaison meetings were undertaken with regular users to facilitate the sharing of information and assist the Division to manage cases as efficiently as possible.

Alternative dispute resolution

The AAT uses ADR in all of these divisions other than the Security Division to help parties understand and narrow the issues in dispute, identify further evidence that will be gathered, and try to reach agreement about how their case should be resolved. During the reporting year, 79 per cent of applications in these divisions were finalised without the Tribunal making a decision following a hearing. At least one ADR process was held in 75 per cent of all finalised cases which were validly lodged. On average, parties spent 78 minutes per case in ADR processes and they continue to be a cost-effective mechanism for achieving review outcomes. Some registries experienced a higher workload per ADR practitioner in the reporting year and we explored different ways of ensuring resources were available in areas of higher demand, including the greater use of videoconferencing and the use of a panel of contractors.

Appeals

The number of appeals lodged against decisions of the AAT in these divisions, while continuing to be low overall, grew from 79 in 2015–16 to 92 in 2016–17. The number of appeals as a proportion of all decisions that could have been appealed in the reporting year was four per cent as in the previous year. The Tribunal’s decision was set aside in 31 per cent of appeals finalised during the reporting period, two percentage points higher than in 2015–16.

Migration and Refugee Division

The Migration and Refugee Division reviews decisions made under the Migration Act about a wide range of visas which permit non-citizens to travel to, enter and remain in Australia on a permanent or temporary basis. These include decisions to refuse to grant visas, to cancel visas and to refuse to approve business sponsors, nominated positions and business activities. Reviewable decisions are generally made by delegates of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection.

The Division received 26,604 applications in 2016–17, 41 per cent more than the number lodged in 2015–16 and the highest number of applications since the establishment of the Division or its predecessor tribunals. The most significant caseload increases were in the business/work, protection and student visa categories which together represented nearly 80 per cent of all cases on hand at 30 June 2017. While the number of applications finalised by the Division in 2016–17 rose by 17 per cent compared to 2015–16, we were not able to keep pace with the growth in lodgements given the available member resources. Key statistics in relation to workload and timeliness for the major areas of work within the Division are set out in Table 3.5.

Table 3.5 Caseload overview, 2015–16 to 2016–17 – Migration and Refugee Division

AREA OF WORK	LODGED		FINALISED		ON HAND AT YEAR END		% FINALISED WITHIN 12 MONTHS		MEDIAN TIME TO FINALISE (WEEKS)
	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17
Migration	14,307	18,518	12,511	13,755	11,330	16,092	67%	70%	36	39
Refugee	4,622	8,086	3,600	5,153	5,434	8,370	36%	54%	64	47
TOTAL	18,929	26,604	16,111	18,908	16,764	24,462	60%	66%	42	40

Migration cases

The majority of lodgements and finalisations in the Division in 2016–17 related to decisions about permanent and temporary entry migration visas. Chart 3.6 shows the number of applications lodged and finalised by key visa categories in the reporting period.

The most common type of migration cases lodged in 2016–17 were applications relating to business or work visas, including business skills visas, skilled visas and temporary work visas, as well as decisions about nomination and sponsorship. These cases represented 32 per cent of migration lodgements and 22 per cent of all lodgements, 19 per cent of all finalisations and 24 per cent of all current applications in the Division at the end of the reporting year. Lodgements in this caseload grew by 44 per cent from 2015–16, particularly in relation to temporary work visas and nomination and sponsorship decisions. It continues to be a complex and technical caseload impacted by legislative and regulatory changes.

Applications relating to decisions to refuse or cancel student visas represented 30 per cent of migration lodgements and 21 per cent of all lodgements. There was an increase of 98 per cent from 2015–16. Student visa refusal and cancellation cases comprised 12 per cent of all finalisations and represented 22 per cent of cases on hand in the Division at 30 June 2017.

Applications for review of decisions to refuse or cancel partner and family visas represented 24 per cent of migration lodgements, 17 per cent of all lodgements in the Division and 27 per cent of all finalisations in the reporting year. Lodgements in this caseload decreased by seven per cent between 2015–16 and 2016–17. This caseload comprised 17 per cent of the active cases in the Division at 30 June 2017, reducing in number by 13 per cent from the previous year.

There was a seven per cent increase in applications relating to visitor visas for tourists and persons visiting relatives in Australia which represented 11 per cent of migration lodgements and seven per cent of all lodgements. Two per cent of the migration caseload and one per cent of all lodgements were about bridging visas which provide temporary lawful status to non-citizens in Australia. The number of bridging visa applications lodged in 2016–17 was 28 per cent lower than the previous reporting period.

Refugee cases

Applications for review of decisions about protection visas require the AAT to consider whether or not the applicant is a person to whom Australia has protection obligations and, in particular, whether they are a refugee or, in the alternative, entitled to complementary protection. This area of work represented 30 per cent of all lodgements in the Division in 2016–17, 27 per cent of all finalisations and approximately one-third of the Division’s active caseload at 30 June 2017.

Lodgements in relation to protection visa decisions were 75 per cent higher in 2016–17 than in 2015–16. This can be attributed to a further significant increase in the number of applications relating to Malaysian nationals which comprised 52 per cent of all lodgements concerning protection visas. The number of applications from Chinese nationals also doubled in the reporting period. Applications relating to nationals from these two countries represented 59 per cent of the active refugee caseload at 30 June 2017. Chart 3.7 shows the number of lodgements and finalisations in 2016–17 by the applicant's country of origin.

The number of applications relating to protection visas lodged by unauthorised maritime arrivals decreased further from 187 in 2015–16 to 146 in the reporting year. The Division does not review decisions made in relation to unauthorised maritime arrivals who entered Australia after 13 August 2012 and before 1 January 2014. These decisions are reviewed by the Immigration Assessment Authority which is covered in Chapter 5 of this report.

Cancellation cases

Applications to the Division for review of decisions to cancel permanent and temporary visas grew by 74 per cent in 2016–17. An overview of the cancellation caseload which otherwise forms part of the migration and refugee caseloads detailed above is set out in Table 3.8. The number of cancellation cases on hand at 30 June 2017 was more than double the number at 30 June 2016.

Table 3.8 Cancellation caseload overview, 2016–17

AREA OF WORK	LODGED		FINALISED		ON HAND AT YEAR END
	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17
Migration	1,141	1,898	1,070	1,190	619	1,327
Refugee	48	168	29	110	31	89
TOTAL	1,189	2,066	1,099	1,300	650	1,416

Caseload strategy

The Division’s caseload strategy for 2016–17 aimed to reduce the age of the active caseload, particularly for refugee cases, and identify and implement case management strategies to more effectively and efficiently finalise cases. As foreshadowed in the 2015–16 annual report, the Division undertook a number of case management projects in 2016–17 which were generally successful and contributed to the Division exceeding its indicative member finalisation targets by 10 per cent.

In relation to the migration caseload, a number of strategies were trialled for certain types of visitor visa cases, including the use of hearing lists. The visitor visa project achieved a considerable reduction in the size of the active caseload in New South Wales and the average age of active visitor cases was also reduced. In the partner visa caseload, pilots were conducted in a number of locations. Key features included triaging cases to identify appropriate review pathways and staff undertaking outreach with parties prior to hearing. Pre-hearing events were also trialled in the business caseload resulting in higher numbers of earlier withdrawals. These projects contributed to the improvement in the proportion of migration cases finalised within 12 months from 67 per cent in 2015–16 to 70 per cent in 2016–17.

In relation to the refugee caseload, a taskforce was established to reduce the number and age of protection visa cases awaiting allocation to a member and to trial different case management processes. Key elements of the approach adopted included triaging cases, batching cases according to country and issues, providing members with targeted country information packages and facilitating member focus groups to develop expertise in particular countries. The taskforce achieved significant gains in reducing the number of older active cases in a number of country cohorts and improving the timeliness of decision-making. The Division finalised 43 per cent more refugee cases than in the previous reporting year with the proportion of cases finalised within 12 months rising from 36 per cent in 2015–16 to 54 per cent in 2016–17.

Despite these improvements, the Division was unable to reduce the caseload on hand because of the significant increase in lodgements and reduced member resources. The ongoing challenge for the Division will be to reduce the active caseload and meet timeliness measures. In addition to seeking the appointment of additional members to deal with the workload, the Division proposes undertaking further case management projects in 2017–18, including making increased use of staff, to promote more timely and efficient finalisation of cases.

Outcomes of reviews

In 2016–17, the Division varied, remitted or set aside the decision under review in 38 per cent of finalised migration cases compared with 37 per cent in 2015–16. The original decision was affirmed in 37 per cent of finalised cases in 2016–17. In relation to the refugee caseload, 11 per cent of cases were remitted to the Department in 2016–17 compared with 16 per cent in 2015–16. The decision under review was affirmed in
62 per cent of cases. The remaining applications were either withdrawn, did not meet application requirements or were dismissed by the Tribunal on the basis that the applicant failed to appear.

As in other divisions, decisions are commonly changed on review because the Tribunal has new or additional evidence that was not available to the original decision-maker. A change in the applicant’s circumstances since the time of the original decision can also be relevant. Taking all of the evidence before us into account, the Tribunal may reach different conclusions when we apply the law and make a decision.

Appeals

There were 3,644 applications for judicial review of Migration and Refugee Division decisions lodged with the Federal Circuit Court of Australia during the reporting period which represents 22 per cent of all decisions made in 2016–17 that could have been appealed. The number of appeals was higher than in the previous year but, as the Division made more decisions in the reporting year, the rate of appeal dropped by one percentage point.

Of judicial review applications finalised in 2016–17, one in five appeals resulted in the decision of the AAT or the former MRT or RRT being set aside by the courts, an improvement on the set-aside rate of approximately one in four decisions in 2015–16. Of these successful appeals, 78 per cent were remitted by consent: the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection agreed that the Tribunal had made a legal error and the decision should be set aside. Ten per cent of the consent remittals were because of a decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court noted in our 2015–16 annual report that overruled previous judicial interpretation of the law (Waensila v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCAFC 32). A further 9.5 per cent of consent remittals concerned error relating to the treatment of non-disclosure certificates issued by delegates of the Minister of the kind identified in Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Singh [2016] FCAFC 183 which is discussed below.

Engagement

The Division engages with key stakeholders in a variety of ways. Regular meetings were held with representatives of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection during the year to discuss strategic and high-level operational issues. There was liaison with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade which provides country information reports for use in refugee decision-making. Members were given country information briefing sessions and meetings were held with Australian overseas representatives. As outlined in Appendix 6, the Division also held community liaison meetings across the country in 2016–17 to exchange information with key stakeholders.

Social Services and Child Support Division

The Social Services and Child Support Division reviews a wide range of decisions made by officers of the Department of Human Services, including decisions about:

• family assistance, social security and student assistance entitlements (referred to as Centrelink decisions)
• child support, and
• paid parental leave.

The Division received 17,450 applications in 2016–17, representing a 12 per cent increase on the number of applications lodged in the previous year. The number of applications finalised increased to 16,407, six per cent more than in 2015–16. With the continued growth in lodgements, the number of cases on hand at 30 June 2017 rose by 32 per cent compared with the number of active cases at 30 June 2016.

Key statistics in relation to caseload and timeliness for the major areas of work within the Division are set out in Table 3.9.

Table 3.9 Caseload overview, 2015–16 to 2016–17 – Social Services and Child Support Division

AREA OF WORK	LODGED		FINALISED		ON HAND AT YEAR END		% FINALISED WITHIN 12 MONTHS		MEDIAN TIME TO FINALISE (WEEKS)
	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17
Centrelink (1st review)	13,201	14,949	13,215	14,098	2,694	3,547	>99%	>99%	11	13
Child support	2,136	2,241	2,098	2,063	533	725	>99%	>99%	12	13
Paid parental leave	206	260	221	246	34	48	100%	>99%	10	10
TOTAL	15,543	17,450	15,534	16,407	3,261	4,320	>99%	>99%	11	13

Applications relating to Centrelink decisions constituted 86 per cent of all lodgements in the Division in the reporting year and were 13 per cent higher than in 2015–16. As shown in Chart 3.10, lodgements relating to decisions about disability support pension continued to be the most common type of application, comprising 41 per cent of all Centrelink lodgements. However, lodgements about decisions of this kind decreased in 2016–17 for the first time in recent years with five per cent fewer applications than in the previous reporting year. Applications increased in relation to the other main payment types: 73 per cent in relation to age pension, 40 per cent in relation to newstart allowance, 24 per cent in relation to family tax benefit and 13 per cent in relation to youth allowance.

The most common types of decisions in relation to which applications were made were those rejecting a claim or about a debt. These were followed by decisions to suspend or cancel a payment and those concerning the rate of payment. The number of applications lodged, seeking review of one or more Centrelink decisions about a debt rose to 5,319 in 2016–17 from 3,365 in 2015–16. Excluding applications finalised on the basis that the Division could not review the decision, generally because no internal review had been conducted, there was a 55 per cent increase in applications of this kind from the previous reporting period.

Lodgements relating to child support decisions represented 13 per cent of all applications received in 2016–17 and increased by five per cent from the previous year. Chart 3.11 illustrates the most common types of decisions under review. Applications relating to requests to change a child support assessment (how much child support is payable) and determinations about percentages of care for a child comprised almost two-thirds of all lodgements.

Applications relating to paid parental leave continued to form only a small part of the Division’s overall caseload with 260 applications lodged in the reporting period. This amounts to a 26 per cent increase from 2015–16.

The number of Centrelink applications finalised increased by seven per cent in 2016–17, while child support finalisations were consistent with the previous reporting period. Median finalisation times for Centrelink and child support applications were 13 weeks, compared to 11 and 12 weeks respectively in 2015–16. Given the record volume of applications received in 2016–17, a small reduction in active members and periodic uncertainty as to member appointments with a consequent inability to list cases before affected members for periods of time, this was a reasonable result. Dealing with the caseload in a timely manner will continue to be a challenge for the Division in 2017–18, particularly with the available number of members.

Developments in 2016–17

The Social Services and Child Support Division is the only division in which applications may be lodged orally. Lodgement by telephone remained the most common method of commencing a review in 2016–17 with
65 per cent of all applications lodged this way. However, applications made online accounted for 22 per cent
of all lodgements this year, up from 12 per cent in the previous year.

In our 2015–16 annual report, we noted concerns relating to the sufficiency of, and extent of redactions to, documents lodged by the Department of Human Services under section 37 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act which affect the Division’s capacity to efficiently conduct reviews. The Division and the Department continued their engagement during the reporting year in relation to these matters. Work was undertaken to clarify the types of documents required to be included for particular types of decisions such as disability pension rejections, income-related social security debts and matters relating to valuation of real property. The former President also issued a new practice direction, Lodgement of Documents under Section 37 and 38AA of the AAT Act in the Social Services and Child Support Division, on 15 May 2017 which clarifies the circumstances in which information may be redacted without the need for an order from the Tribunal. The Division continues to monitor the quality of the documents as well as the volume of requests that need to be made for further information.

In 2016–17, the Division devised and commenced a number of strategic caseload management trials. They have involved caseload practice managers, staff with significant expertise in relation to the Division’s jurisdiction, triaging certain Centrelink and child support cases and undertaking outreach with the parties in select cases. Benefits of this approach include applicants and other parties having a better understanding of the decision under review, the issues in the application and the scope of the Tribunal’s powers at an early stage of the review as well as the potential for an earlier resolution to be reached in some cases. The trials will continue into 2017–18.

During the reporting year, an increasing number of decisions were made with the Tribunal delivering the decision and the reasons for decision orally at the end of a hearing as an effective and responsive way to provide applicants with a timely decision. Ten per cent of all first review decisions were delivered orally. Most commonly, we provided oral reasons for decision in Centrelink cases, with written reasons provided upon request by a party.

The Division continued to facilitate legal advice clinics in our Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney registries during 2016–17, enabling applicants to seek independent advice about their first review cases.

Second review and appeals

Certain categories of decisions made by the Social Services and Child Support Division, including most decisions in Centrelink cases as well as select child support and paid parental leave decisions, can be reviewed by the AAT’s General Division. Other decisions are subject to review by the courts on appeal.

Of the 2,532 applications lodged in the General Division during the reporting period for second review of Centrelink decisions, 90 were lodged by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services and one by the Secretary of the Department of Education and Training. Of the 111 Secretary appeals finalised in the period, our decision remained unchanged in 49 per cent of the applications: 44 applications were withdrawn, the decision was affirmed following a hearing in seven applications, one decision was affirmed by consent and two applications were dismissed by agreement. The Division’s decision was set aside or varied after hearing in
44 applications and set aside or varied by consent in 13 applications. Information relating to the outcomes of all applications for second review can be found in Appendix 4.

In the reporting period, there were 23 statutory appeals from our child support decisions lodged in the Federal Circuit Court and the Federal Court, compared with a total of 33 appeals in the preceding year. The number of appeals as a proportion of all decisions that could have been appealed in the reporting year remained low at one per cent. In relation to the outcomes of the 28 appeals finalised in 2016–17, five were allowed and
23 dismissed or discontinued.

External scrutiny

The AAT’s operations are subject to external scrutiny through various mechanisms. The principal form of scrutiny in relation to how we conduct reviews and our decisions is by way of review in the courts. Our operations are also subject to scrutiny through requests made under the Freedom of Information Act, complaints to the Commonwealth Ombudsman and other bodies, audits by the Australian National Audit Office and parliamentary scrutiny.

Appeals

There are three primary appeal pathways for review by the courts of the decisions we make.

• A party may appeal to the Federal Court, on a question of law, from most types of final decisions made in divisions other than the Migration and Refugee Division under section 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act. The Federal Court may transfer the appeal to the Federal Circuit Court unless the Tribunal was constituted by, or included, the President or a Deputy President.
• A party to a first review of a child support decision dealt with by the Social Services and Child Support Division may appeal, on a question of law, to the Federal Circuit Court under section 44AAA of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act unless the Tribunal was constituted by, or included, the President or a Deputy President.
• An applicant or the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection may seek judicial review under Part 8 of the Migration Act of most AAT decisions made under that Act. Applications relating to decisions made in the Migration and Refugee Division must be lodged in the Federal Circuit Court. Applications relating to most decisions dealt with in the General Division must be lodged in the Federal Court.

A party may also seek judicial review of certain decisions made in the course of the review process and in respect of certain final decisions under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977, section 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903, Part 8 of the Migration Act or section 75(v) of the Constitution.

As shown in Table 3.12, 3,759 appeals were lodged in 2016–17, 97 per cent of which were applications for judicial review of decisions made by the Migration and Refugee Division or the former MRT or RRT. The proportion of migration and refugee decisions that were appealed was considerably higher than for our other divisions.

There were 2,743 appeals relating to decisions of the AAT, MRT, RRT and SSAT finally determined in the courts during the reporting year. Overall, the Tribunal’s decision was set aside in 20 per cent of those appeals. However, this amounted to only 3 per cent of all decisions made in 2015–16 that could have been appealed to the courts.

Table 3.12 Court appeals lodged and finalised, 2015–16 to 2016–17 – By division^a

DIVISION	COURT APPEALS LODGED				COURT APPEALS FINALISEDd
	Lodgedb		Proportion of total AAT decisionsc		Finalised		Proportion allowed against total appeals finalised		Proportion allowed against total decisionse
	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17	2015–16	2016–17
FOI, General, NDIS, Security, Taxation and Commercial, and Veterans’ Appeals	79	92	4%	4%	96	98	29%	31%	1.3%	1.4%
Migration and Refugee	3,269	3,644	23%	22%	2,958	2,617	24%	20%	3.7%	3.6%
Social Services and Child Supportf	33	23	2%	1%	33	28	9%	18%	0.2%	0.3%
TOTAL	3,381	3,759	19%	18%	3,087	2,743	24%	20%	3.3%	3.0%

^a These figures include appeals lodged or finalised in the reporting year that relate to decisions made by the AAT, MRT, RRT or SSAT prior to 1 July 2015 as well as decisions made by the AAT from 1 July 2015.

^b These figures include some appeals lodged in relation to decisions made in a previous year.

^c These figures represent the number of appeals lodged in 2015–16 and 2016–17 as a proportion of all AAT decisions made in those respective years that could have been appealed to the courts.

^d Where a decision of a judge of the Federal Circuit Court, a single judge of the Federal Court or the Full Court of the Federal Court has been appealed, only the ultimate result is counted for the purpose of these statistics.

^e These figures represent the number of successful appeals in 2015–16 and 2016–17 as a proportion of all decisions of the AAT, MRT, RRT and SSAT made in the previous financial year that could have been appealed to the courts.

^f Only child support and employer-related paid parental leave decisions may be appealed to the courts under section 44 or 44AAA of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act. Other decisions are subject to second review in the AAT.

More information on appeals lodged and determined during the reporting year by major areas of work within divisions is available in Table A4.5 in Appendix 4.

During the reporting year, a number of judicial decisions had an impact on our procedures and decision-making.

Aulakh v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCCA 544

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision of the MRT that affirmed a decision to refuse her a skilled visa on the basis that she had obtained a skills assessment to support her application using employment references that were false or misleading. The MRT took evidence from the purported author of one of the references at the hearing as well as from the applicant and the applicant’s husband. The MRT found that the applicant had not been employed by the referee, as claimed, on the basis of inconsistencies between the evidence the referee gave to the Department and the MRT as well as inconsistencies between the evidence of the referee, the applicant and the applicant’s husband at hearing about the terms of the applicant’s employment. The Court held that the MRT fell into jurisdictional error as its conclusion was not supported by the evidence and the MRT could not have reached this conclusion if it were acting reasonably because the inconsistencies were minor. This and other similar cases being remitted to the Tribunal on the grounds of legal unreasonableness, illogicality and irrationality impact on the Division by increasing uncertainty in relation to the boundaries of permissible decision-making. The Minister has appealed this decision to the Federal Court.

DZAFH v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2017] FCCA 387

The applicant, who was in immigration detention, sought judicial review of a decision of the RRT that it did not have jurisdiction to review the decision to refuse to grant him a protection visa because his application was lodged outside the prescribed seven working-day time limit set out in regulation 4.31 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Before the RRT made its decision, it sent the applicant a letter noting the prescribed period to apply for review had expired and inviting him to comment on the validity of his review application. The Court found that:

• the RRT’s calculation of the prescribed period was incorrect because it had not included the day on which the applicant was notified of the original decision in calculating the prescribed period, and
• the correct interpretation of regulation 4.31 is that the prescribed time period begins on the day the applicant is taken to have been notified of the original decision.

The effect of the judgment is that the time available to applicants to apply for review of a protection visa decision under Part 7 of the Migration Act is calculated as being one day shorter than the previous approach taken by the AAT. The AAT took steps to advise stakeholders of the change. The judgment does not affect how the prescribed time period for applying for review of a migration decision under Part 5 of the Migration Act is calculated.

MZAFZ v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCA 1081
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Singh [2016] FCAFC 183

In MZAFZ, the appellant sought judicial review of a decision of the RRT that affirmed a decision to refuse her a protection visa. The Department of Immigration and Border Protection file which was given to the RRT included a certificate issued by a delegate of the Minister under section 438 of the Migration Act certifying that it would be contrary to the public interest to disclose certain information in the file. The appellant argued that the section 438 certificate was invalid and that the Tribunal’s failure to put the material purportedly covered by the certificate to the appellant for comment constituted a denial of procedural fairness. The Court found that the certificate issued by the delegate was invalid on its face as the stated basis for the certificate was that it contained internal working documents which is neither a necessary nor sufficient basis for a public interest immunity claim. The Court inferred that the RRT had acted on the invalid certificate with the result that the RRT had made a jurisdictional error. The Court also held that, even if the certificate had been valid, procedural fairness required the RRT to disclose its existence to the applicant, give the applicant an opportunity to make submissions about its validity, tell the applicant how the RRT was going to take into account the information it covered and give the applicant an opportunity to ask the RRT to disclose the information, which it had a discretion to do.

In Singh, a delegate of the Minister refused to grant the respondent a skilled visa on the basis that the skills assessment he submitted in support of his application was a bogus document. The respondent applied to the MRT for review of the decision and a delegate of the Minister issued a certificate under section 375A of the Migration Act requiring the MRT to ensure that certain information held on its file would not be disclosed to anyone. The MRT gave the respondent particulars of adverse information contained within the Departmental file and invited him to comment on or respond to the information, but it did not disclose the existence of the certificate. The MRT affirmed the delegate’s decision and the respondent sought judicial review of the MRT decision. The Full Court of the Federal Court held that the MRT had denied the respondent procedural fairness by not informing him of the existence of the certificate.

The judgments in MZAFZ and Singh have established principles that the AAT must apply in cases where there is a non-disclosure certificate issued by the Minister, including assessing the validity of the certificate and considering what to disclose to the applicant in light of the AAT’s procedural fairness obligations. Following these judgments, the AAT has engaged with the Department about the use of these certificates and made changes to its procedures in handling cases involving these certificates, including in relation to assessing the validity of certificates and returning invalid certificates to the Department for reconsideration. These judgments are likely to result in a large number of AAT decisions being set aside on appeal and remitted for re-determination.

Negri v Secretary, Department of Social Services [2016] FCA 879

This judgment discussed the extent to which the reasons for a Tribunal decision, given orally, may differ from those given in writing after a request has been made by a party for a written statement of reasons under section 43(2A) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act. The Court observed that written reasons may more fully explain the Tribunal’s findings and reasoning, improve expression and clarity and even include a matter that was on the Tribunal’s mind at the time of the oral decision but not stated due to oversight. However, the Court concluded that the Tribunal is not permitted to substantially divert from the reasoning upon which its decision was made. It is permitted to explain that reasoning differently and, in doing so, is required to address the matters specified in section 43(2B), namely its findings on material questions of fact and a reference to the evidence or other material on which those findings were based.

Freedom of information

Two applications were lodged with the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner in 2016–17 seeking review of decisions we made in relation to requests for access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act. Two applications were finalised during the reporting year, one of which was an outstanding review relating to a decision of the former MRT. No decisions were made that have had, or may have, a significant effect on our operations.

Information Publication Scheme

Agencies subject to the Freedom of Information Act are required to publish information to the public as part of the Information Publication Scheme. This requirement is in Part II of the Freedom of Information Act and has replaced the former requirement to publish a section 8 statement in an annual report. Each agency must display on its website a plan showing what information it publishes in accordance with the IPS requirements. The AAT’s plan is on our website.

Complaints to external bodies

The Australian Human Rights Commission advised us of two complaints about the AAT in 2016–17. One complaint was finalised during the reporting period with the complainant electing not to proceed with the complaint.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman received 61 approaches concerning the AAT during the reporting period. The Ombudsman finalised 62 approaches within the reporting period and no investigations were conducted.

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner received five and closed seven privacy complaints relating to the AAT in 2016–17. In relation to finalised complaints of which the AAT was given notice, one complaint was withdrawn, two were finalised on the basis that there had been no interference with the complainant’s privacy and one was settled.

Reports on the operations of the AAT

The AAT’s operations were not the subject of any report by the Auditor-General, any parliamentary committee or by the Commonwealth Ombudsman during the reporting period.

Service to users

The AAT strives to be accessible to our wide range of users and potential users, including people from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds and people with disability. We employ various measures to assist people to apply to the Tribunal and participate in the review process, particularly where a person is representing themselves. We have an internal Accessibility Advisory Group which provides advice on accessibility issues and acts as a point of coordination for activities aimed at improving accessibility. We also liaise with the Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity, an advisory body formed to assist courts and tribunals respond to the needs of culturally diverse communities.

Information about the AAT and assistance in relation to the review process

We offer written information about our role and procedures in plain language in a variety of formats. These materials include practice directions, guides, guidelines and fact sheets. Some information is made available in community languages and in videos. We also make resources available to help people understand how we will apply the law, including the Guide to Refugee Law in Australia which is available on our website and AAT decisions which are published on the AustLII website (www.austlii.edu.au). We publish a selection of written decisions made in the Migration and Refugee Division and in the Social Services and Child Support Division’s child support jurisdiction. Most written decisions made in other divisions are published.

AAT staff respond to enquiries from parties and representatives about the review process and proactively contact self-represented parties in some types of cases to explain our processes as well as identify whether a party will require an interpreter or assistance because of a disability. We make information available to parties about legal aid services, community legal centres, and other persons or organisations that may be able to provide advice and assistance in relation to the review process, or how to find such assistance.

In New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia, the AAT has worked with legal aid commissions and community legal centres to establish legal advice schemes. A solicitor attends the AAT and provides advice and minor assistance to self-represented parties in certain types of cases, particularly reviews of Centrelink decisions. Further assistance, such as representation, may be provided if a person meets eligibility requirements.

People from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds

We take steps to ensure our users from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are able to communicate with us effectively and also seek to address other cultural diversity issues in delivering our services.

Interpreting services

If a party or witness requires an interpreter, we engage one and meet the cost. We generally use interpreters accredited by the National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters at the ‘Professional Interpreter’ level. If an interpreter is not available in a language at that level, we may use an interpreter accredited as a ‘Paraprofessional Interpreter’ or, if NAATI does not offer accreditation testing in the language, an interpreter recognised by NAATI.

We have developed information for interpreters in relation to our procedures and terminology, as well as guidelines relating to the role of the interpreter.

Indigenous Australians

The AAT is committed to improving access for Indigenous Australians, including by educating members and staff on how to work effectively and respectfully with Indigenous users and their communities. Members and staff have access to an eLearning module designed to improve Indigenous cultural awareness, as well as our internal guide on working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Persons with disability

We aim to make access easier for people with disability by:

• ensuring our website meets the World Wide Web Consortium’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.0 (WCAG 2.0) web standard to Level AA
• making ReadSpeaker, a text-to-speech software service, available on our website
• providing portable hearing loop systems in Tribunal premises
• facilitating telephone contact for people with a hearing or speech impairment
• making all of our premises wheelchair accessible and ensuring other premises used by the AAT are accessible, and
• providing facilities for participation in conferences and hearings by telephone or video-link.

Service Charter

We have a Service Charter which sets out the standards of service that people can expect when they deal with us. Information on the extent of our compliance with those standards during 2016–17 (where information is available) is in Table 3.13.

The Service Charter also includes information about how users can give us feedback, including how to make a complaint about the AAT. It also sets out our standards for responding to complaints. More information relating to the handling of complaints made to us during the reporting period is set out below.

Table 3.13 Performance against service standards, 2016–17

COMMITMENT	RESULT FOR 2016–17
We will treat you with respect and courtesy
We will be polite, respectful and courteous and use language that is clear and understandable.	Of the 190 complaints finalised in 2016–17, five involved adverse findings in relation to issues of this kind.
We will make ourselves accessible
Staff will answer telephone queries from 8:30am to 5:00pm on working days. You can contact us on 1800 228 333 from anywhere in Australia.	Staff were available to answer telephone queries from 8:30am to 5:00pm on each working day throughout the year. Our national 1800 telephone number was available throughout the year.
All correspondence will include our contact details.	All AAT correspondence includes contact details for the Tribunal.
Wheelchair access and portable hearing loop systems are available at each registry.	All AAT premises were wheelchair accessible. Portable induction loops were available at each of our registries.
Hearings will be held in capital cities and in regional centres (where possible).	We held hearings in all capital cities and eight regional locations.
We conduct many hearings by phone or videoconference.	We conducted the following number of case events by telephone or video-link: conferences – 7,011 other alternative dispute resolution processes – 14 directions hearings – 2,264 interlocutory hearings – 481 hearings – 10,417 (1,847 in the Migration and Refugee Division, 8,465 in the Social Services and Child Support Division and 105 in other divisions).
If you need an interpreter we will provide one free of charge.	We arranged for an interpreter to participate in any alternative dispute resolution process or hearing where needed. Interpreters were provided free of charge.
We have information about our procedures available from our offices and on our website.	Our website contains information about our procedures. AAT staff assist applicants to access this information, including providing the information in printed form. AAT staff also provide verbal information about Tribunal processes.
We will deal with you fairly
You or your representative will have a reasonable opportunity to present your case.	We provide parties with an opportunity to present their case in various ways depending on the type of decision we are reviewing. Parties may provide information and submissions at any time during the review as well as in response to specific requests from the Tribunal. We generally hold a hearing at which parties may give evidence and make submissions before the Tribunal makes a decision in a case.
We will operate in an efficient manner
We will acknowledge receipt of applications.	The average time for acknowledging receipt of applications during the reporting period was 2 days.
We will respond to enquiries within a reasonable time.	Of the 190 complaints finalised in 2016–17, none involved adverse findings in relation to issues of this kind.

Complaints to the Tribunal

Complaints may be made to us orally or in writing. We encourage members and staff to address issues or concerns that are raised by people with whom they are dealing at the time of the interaction where this is possible. In circumstances where issues cannot be readily resolved, the person will be advised that they may make a written complaint, including by way of our online feedback form.

We aim to provide a final response to a written complaint within 20 working days. If more time is required because of the complexity of the complaint or the need to consult with other persons before providing a response, we advise the complainant of progress in handling the complaint.

We treat all complaints seriously and conduct investigations in an impartial manner as quickly as possible having regard to the principles of procedural fairness. Possible responses to complaints include the provision of information or an explanation, an apology, a change to practice and procedure or consideration of additional training and development for AAT personnel.

During 2016–17, the AAT received 194 complaints, an increase of 56 compared with the previous reporting period. Table 3.14 shows the number of complaints made to the AAT over the last two years and the number of complaints received for every 1,000 applications we finalised. While somewhat higher than 2015–16, the rate of complaints remains low.

Table 3.14 Complaints made to the AAT, 2015–16 to 2016–17

	2015–16	2016–17
Complaints made	138	194
Applications finalised	38,146	42,224
Complaints per 1,000 applications	3.6	4.6

Table 3.15 shows the subject matter of the complaints received in the reporting period.

Table 3.15 Issues raised in complaints to the AAT, 2016–17

ISSUE	NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS
Tribunal decisions	73
Conduct of members	46
Procedural issues	28
Delay/timeliness	17
Conduct of staff	11
Privacy	4
Fee refund	4
Conduct of conferences	4
Other	7
TOTAL	194

We provided a response to 190 complaints in 2016–17, responding to 177 of those complaints within
20 working days. The average number of days from complaint to final response was seven working days.

We formed the view that we could have handled matters more appropriately in 18 complaints which raised issues concerning administrative error, how Tribunal members and personnel communicated with users, procedure and timeliness. We offered an apology in each case and raised the matters with the relevant areas and personnel.