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

This matter concerned an application by the applicant for an extension of time to seek review of a decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Social Services & Child Support Division. The applicant's claim for a pension had initially been rejected by Centrelink on 20 September 2016, on the basis that he was not in Australia at the time of lodging the claim, as required by s 29(1)(b) of the *Social Security (Administration) Act 1999* (Cth). This decision was affirmed by an authorised review officer on 15 February 2017, and subsequently affirmed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tier 1 Review) on 30 June 2017. The applicant sought to appeal the Tier 1 decision to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, General Division (Tier 2 Review), but did so outside the prescribed time limits.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether to grant the applicant an extension of time to lodge his application for a Tier 2 Review of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal's Tier 1 decision. The respondent opposed the application for an extension of time. The Tribunal's jurisdiction to hear such an application was established by s 179(1) of the *Social Security (Administration) Act 1999* (Cth), which permits applications for review of decisions to be made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal considered the relevant factors for granting an extension of time, including the length of the delay and whether the applicant had an arguable case. While the applicant was found to have an arguable case, the Tribunal was not satisfied that granting an extension of time was reasonable in all the circumstances. The Tribunal ultimately refused the application for an extension of time.