Al Zamal and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Al Zamal against a decision of the Social Services and Child Support Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which affirmed the cancellation of his disability support pension. The cancellation was based on Centrelink's assertion that on 31 August 2016, Mr Al Zamal was not residing in Australia in accordance with section 7(2)(a) of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth).

The AAT Member was required to determine whether Mr Al Zamal was residing in Australia on the relevant date. In doing so, the Member was mandated by section 7(3) of the *Social Security Act 1991* to have regard to a series of specified matters, including the nature of the applicant's accommodation in Australia, the nature and extent of family relationships, employment or financial ties, assets, and travel patterns outside Australia. The Member also acknowledged the ordinary concept of residence and the need to consider all relevant matters, not just those enumerated in section 7(3).

The Member applied the principles articulated in *Re Clifopoulos and Secretary, Department of Social Security* [1994] AATA 282, which emphasise that the criteria in section 7(3) are not to be applied mechanically but rather as guides to determining a person's intention as to their place of residence. The relevance and importance of each factor vary with the circumstances of each case. The Member considered the nature of Mr Al Zamal's accommodation in Australia, noting his evidence that he rents a granny flat from a friend and that there is no formal lease, but rather an arrangement between friends.

The AAT Member affirmed the decision of the Social Services and Child Support Division. The decision noted that if Mr Al Zamal decides in the future to reside in Australia, he may apply for a disability support pension.