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

This matter concerned an application for an extension of time to seek review of a decision by the Secretary, Department of Social Services, concerning an overpayment of disability support pension. Mr Anastasis had been in receipt of the pension since February 2008. The Department raised a debt of $21,258.40 for the period between November 2011 and May 2014, based on bank deposits into Mr Anastasis' accounts which were treated as income. This decision was affirmed by an authorised review officer and subsequently by the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT). Mr Anastasis lodged his application for an extension of time with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) in July 2017, after the SSAT decision in May 2015. The Department later recalculated the debt to $18,372.82, acknowledging Mr Anastasis' business ceased operating in September 2013.

The AAT was required to determine whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant Mr Anastasis an extension of time to lodge his application for review. In considering this, the Tribunal applied the principles established in *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Cohen*, which require an applicant to provide an acceptable explanation for the delay and demonstrate that it is fair and equitable to extend time. The Tribunal also considered any prejudice to the respondent, the merits of the substantial application, and considerations of fairness between the applicant and others in similar positions. The Secretary opposed the extension of time.

The Tribunal noted that Mr Anastasis provided oral evidence regarding his circumstances over the preceding two years, including homelessness, complex personal issues, ongoing legal processes, and significant health problems. He also stated he had informed the Department and SSAT that the bank deposits included salary paid to his former partner and loan repayments. The Tribunal found there was insufficient evidence to decide the merits of Mr Anastasis' explanation for the deposits, but considered that his stated circumstances might allow for the debt to be waived under section 1237AAD of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) if an overpayment was established. Weighing these factors, the Tribunal concluded that Mr Anastasis' substantive matter might have merit, which weighed in favour of granting the extension.

The Tribunal was satisfied that it was reasonable in the circumstances to grant the extension of time sought by Mr Anastasis. Accordingly, the application for an extension of time was granted.