From 14 October 2024 the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) replaces the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). Appeal pathways and matters remain largely the same as previous AAT arrangements under ART arrangements, although specific legislative section numbers in the ART Act differ. Importantly, timeframes for appeals for veterans and provision of information etc. remain the same. Except for pages relating to prior historical rulings, reviews and advice, after 14 October 2024 references to the AAT in these pages should be taken as a reference to ART.
If, for example, the AAT decides, contrary to the result of the MRCC's internal reconsideration, that an injured employee is entitled to be paid an amount of compensation for a permanent whole person impairment, the MRCC is obliged to implement the AAT's decision as quickly as possible by finding liability to pay the appropriate amount of compensation.
However, if the MRCC does not agree with the AAT's decision and wishes to appeal to the Federal Court, it is necessary that an application for a stay of payment be lodged with the Federal Court as soon as possible. There is no guarantee that the Federal Court will grant the stay of payment. If it does not, the MRCC is obliged to determine the employee's entitlement to lump sum compensation for permanent impairment without delay. This would normally involve the National Office Appeals Section's referring a copy of the AAT's decision to the relevant MRCC State or Territory office with a request that the employee's entitlement be determined as quickly as possible.
It is also notable that the AAT itself has a right to issue an order for a stay of payment, although in practice this is a power which is rarely applied, either by the AAT, or by the Federal Court.