Boxall and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 764
•26 April 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Boxall and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2019] AATA 764
[2019] AATA 764
26 April 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Boxall against a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services to suspend his age pension. Mr Boxall, an Australian citizen, had been granted an age pension on 11 January 2018, effective from 3 December 2017, after returning to Australia. He subsequently departed Australia on 4 April 2018, less than two years after his most recent return. The Department suspended his pension on this basis, a decision affirmed by an Authorised Review Officer. Mr Boxall then applied for a review of that decision to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Boxall was entitled to receive age pension payments from 4 April 2018, when he departed Australia. This involved determining whether he satisfied the requirements of section 1220 of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), which necessitates consideration of whether he was an Australian resident prior to 17 October 2005, whether he ceased to be an Australian resident between 17 October 2005 and 1 December 2017, whether he again became an Australian resident between 2 December 2017 and 3 April 2018, and whether he was granted age pension within two years of again becoming an Australian resident and then left Australia before the end of that two-year period.
The Tribunal considered the definition of an Australian resident under section 7(2) of the Act, which requires a person to reside in Australia. Section 7(3) of the Act outlines factors to be taken into account, including the nature of accommodation, family relationships, employment and financial ties, assets in Australia, frequency and duration of travel outside Australia, and any other relevant matter indicating an intention to remain permanently in Australia. The Tribunal noted that while it is not bound by the Guide to Social Security Law, it would generally follow its policy advice. The Tribunal found that while Mr Boxall had family, financial ties, and assets in Australia, these were outweighed by the frequency and duration of his absences from Australia during the period 17 October 2005 to 1 December 2017. The Tribunal concluded that Mr Boxall had ceased to reside in Australia during that period and therefore ceased to be an Australian resident.
Consequently, the Tribunal found that Mr Boxall had ceased to be an Australian resident during the period from 17 October 2005 to 1 December 2017. Although he became an Australian resident again between 2 December 2017 and 3 April 2018, his departure from Australia on 4 April 2018, within two years of his re-establishment as a resident and the grant of his age pension, meant that the pension was not payable to him during his absence from Australia under section 1220 of the Act. The Tribunal affirmed the decision to suspend the age pension.
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Boxall was entitled to receive age pension payments from 4 April 2018, when he departed Australia. This involved determining whether he satisfied the requirements of section 1220 of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), which necessitates consideration of whether he was an Australian resident prior to 17 October 2005, whether he ceased to be an Australian resident between 17 October 2005 and 1 December 2017, whether he again became an Australian resident between 2 December 2017 and 3 April 2018, and whether he was granted age pension within two years of again becoming an Australian resident and then left Australia before the end of that two-year period.
The Tribunal considered the definition of an Australian resident under section 7(2) of the Act, which requires a person to reside in Australia. Section 7(3) of the Act outlines factors to be taken into account, including the nature of accommodation, family relationships, employment and financial ties, assets in Australia, frequency and duration of travel outside Australia, and any other relevant matter indicating an intention to remain permanently in Australia. The Tribunal noted that while it is not bound by the Guide to Social Security Law, it would generally follow its policy advice. The Tribunal found that while Mr Boxall had family, financial ties, and assets in Australia, these were outweighed by the frequency and duration of his absences from Australia during the period 17 October 2005 to 1 December 2017. The Tribunal concluded that Mr Boxall had ceased to reside in Australia during that period and therefore ceased to be an Australian resident.
Consequently, the Tribunal found that Mr Boxall had ceased to be an Australian resident during the period from 17 October 2005 to 1 December 2017. Although he became an Australian resident again between 2 December 2017 and 3 April 2018, his departure from Australia on 4 April 2018, within two years of his re-establishment as a resident and the grant of his age pension, meant that the pension was not payable to him during his absence from Australia under section 1220 of the Act. The Tribunal affirmed the decision to suspend the age pension.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
-
Appeal
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Boxall and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2019] AATA 764
Most Recent Citation
Hariz and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2021] AATA 614
Cases Citing This Decision
1
Cases Cited
6
Statutory Material Cited
0
Harding v Commissioner of Taxation
[2018] FCA 837