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

Case

[2019] AATA 330

6 March 2019


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Blake and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2019] AATA 330 [2019] AATA 330 6 March 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Tristian Blake against a decision of the Secretary, Department of Social Services, affirming a decision that she did not qualify for a Disability Support Pension. The appeal was heard by Senior Member Chris Puplick AM of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms Blake met the criteria for a Disability Support Pension under the relevant provisions of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), specifically concerning her impairments and their impact on her capacity to work during the qualification period of August to November 2017. This involved determining if her impairments resulted in a total of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables and, crucially, whether she had a continuing inability to work.

The Tribunal reasoned that while Ms Blake's impairments, including fibromyalgia and bipolar disorder, certainly caused her difficulties during the qualification period, they were not of a sufficient level to prevent her from attending a programme of support or render her unfit for all future work at the date of her claim. The Tribunal gave weight to previous assessments by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which had accepted reports from Job Capacity Assessors, noting the expertise of the member presiding over that earlier decision. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that Ms Blake had a reasonable prospect of completing a programme of support and being able to work for at least 15 hours per week without such a programme, albeit in a limited range of occupations. Consequently, she did not meet the requirements of s 94(2)(a) or s 94(2)(b) of the Act, nor did she have an ongoing incapacity to work as required by s 94(1)(c)(i).

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review. It noted that the situation had evolved since the qualification period, and a future claim might attract more favourable consideration, but this did not affect the determination of the claim made in August 2017.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Appeal

  • Judicial Review

  • Standing

  • Statutory Construction