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

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Ball against a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services affirming a decision to reject her claim for a disability support pension. The primary dispute revolved around whether Ms Ball's conditions met the criteria for a disability support pension, specifically whether her impairments were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, and whether they rated 20 or more points under the relevant Impairment Tables. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal, specifically A Poljak SM, was tasked with determining these issues.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Ms Ball's mental health condition was fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised during the relevant period, and whether her impairments, including those related to drug dependency, rated 20 or more points under the Impairment Tables. The Secretary contended that the mental health condition was not fully diagnosed as the diagnostic requirements of Table 5 of the Impairment Tables, which necessitate evidence from a psychiatrist or a clinical psychologist, had not been met.

The Tribunal found that while Ms Ball's general practitioner and a registered psychologist had provided reports indicating diagnoses of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder, the psychologist was not a clinical psychologist as required by the Introduction to Table 5. Further, a psychiatrist's report, though provided after the relevant period, offered insufficient detail regarding the condition's history and treatment during that time. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Ms Ball's mental health condition was fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised. However, regarding drug dependency, the Tribunal found a moderate functional impact, rating 10 points, based on evidence of sustained remission through a long-term methadone program and the ability to complete daily activities.

As Ms Ball's conditions did not collectively rate 20 or more points under the Impairment Tables, it was unnecessary to consider her continuing inability to work. Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, concluding that Ms Ball's claim for a disability support pension could not succeed. The Tribunal noted that Ms Ball was free to reapply for a disability support pension at any time.