Bibani and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)
Case
•
[2017] AATA 1386
•29 August 2017
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Bibani and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2017] AATA 1386
[2017] AATA 1386
29 August 2017
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for a disability support pension (DSP) by Bibani against the Secretary, Department of Social Services. The applicant sought to challenge the decision to affirm a previous decision that she did not qualify for the DSP. The case was heard by Ms N Isenberg, Senior Member, of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's multiple impairments, as assessed under the *Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-Related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011*, rated at 20 points or more, and whether she had a continuing inability to work, as defined by the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) and related legislative instruments. Specifically, the Tribunal was required to consider the criteria for a condition to be considered "permanent" for the purposes of the Impairment Tables, and the requirements for "active participation in a program of support" under the *Social Security (Active Participation for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2014*.
The Tribunal noted that the eligibility criteria for a DSP are cumulative, requiring a physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairment, an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables, and a continuing inability to work. While there was no dispute that the applicant had impairments, the assessment under the Impairment Tables required conditions to be fully diagnosed, fully treated, fully stabilised, and likely to persist for more than two years. Crucially, the Tribunal found that the applicant had not met the requirement of actively participating in a program of support during the relevant period. As this was a cumulative requirement for establishing a continuing inability to work, the applicant could not satisfy all the criteria under section 94(1)(c) of the Act.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant was ineligible for the disability support pension during the relevant period due to her failure to meet the active participation requirement.
The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's multiple impairments, as assessed under the *Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-Related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011*, rated at 20 points or more, and whether she had a continuing inability to work, as defined by the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) and related legislative instruments. Specifically, the Tribunal was required to consider the criteria for a condition to be considered "permanent" for the purposes of the Impairment Tables, and the requirements for "active participation in a program of support" under the *Social Security (Active Participation for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2014*.
The Tribunal noted that the eligibility criteria for a DSP are cumulative, requiring a physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairment, an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables, and a continuing inability to work. While there was no dispute that the applicant had impairments, the assessment under the Impairment Tables required conditions to be fully diagnosed, fully treated, fully stabilised, and likely to persist for more than two years. Crucially, the Tribunal found that the applicant had not met the requirement of actively participating in a program of support during the relevant period. As this was a cumulative requirement for establishing a continuing inability to work, the applicant could not satisfy all the criteria under section 94(1)(c) of the Act.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant was ineligible for the disability support pension during the relevant period due to her failure to meet the active participation requirement.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Statutory Construction
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Bibani and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2017] AATA 1386
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
6
Statutory Material Cited
0
Re Bobera and Secretary, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
[2012] AATA 922
Re Fanning and Secretary, Department of Social Services
[2014] AATA 447
O'Gorman-Watson and Secretary, Department of Social Services
[2014] AATA 277