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

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant against a decision of the Social Services & Child Support Division (SSCSD) affirming a decision to reject his claim for a Disability Support Pension (DSP). The applicant contended that his impairments attracted at least 20 impairment points under the relevant Impairment Tables and that he had a continuing inability to work (CITW). The SSCSD had found that while the applicant's impairments attracted 20 points, he did not meet the CITW requirements as he had not been assigned a severe impairment nor actively participated in a Program of Support (PoS).

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant's impairments attracted 20 or more impairment points under the relevant Impairment Tables and, if so, whether the applicant had a CITW. The Tribunal considered the applicant's submissions regarding his lack of understanding of the requirement to participate in a PoS. The applicant's treating doctor's report, though dated outside the relevant period, was considered for its potential relevance to the applicant's condition and functional impairments during that period.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's spinal function impairment rating of 10 points under Table 4 was correct, noting a limited range of movement and difficulty sitting for short periods. While acknowledging the applicant experienced significant pain, evidence from a witness regarding an incident of pain and transport to hospital was deemed not of assistance as it related to a timeframe outside the relevant period. Crucially, the Tribunal found no evidence that the applicant had been exited from a PoS due to an inability to improve his work capacity.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant could not be found to have a CITW as he had not met the PoS requirement and had not achieved 20 points under a single table. The decision under review was therefore affirmed.