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

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to affirm the cancellation of the applicant's Disability Support Pension (DSP). The applicant had previously been in receipt of a DSP from 2008 to 2018. The cancellation occurred following a medical review in 2018, which resulted in the applicant being assigned only five impairment points under the Impairment Tables. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant met the eligibility criteria for a DSP under section 94(1) of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) during the relevant qualification period, which was from 5 June 2018 to 4 September 2018.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant suffered from physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairments during the qualification period, whether these impairments were permanent (meaning fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised and likely to persist for more than two years), and if so, whether these impairments attracted a rating of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables. The Tribunal also needed to consider whether the applicant had a continuing inability to work, although this became unnecessary given the findings on the impairment rating.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant had suffered from mental health conditions, chronic motor axonopathy, osteoarthritis, and fatty liver/mild hepatomegaly during the qualification period, he did not meet the criteria for a DSP. Specifically, the Tribunal accepted that the applicant's mental health conditions were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, but found insufficient evidence regarding their functional impact to assign a rating of 20 points or more. Regarding chronic motor axonopathy, the Tribunal determined it was fully diagnosed but not fully treated and stabilised during the qualification period, thus precluding an impairment rating. The conditions of osteoarthritis and fatty liver/mild hepatomegaly were also found to lack sufficient evidence of permanence or functional impact. Consequently, the applicant's conditions did not attract the required 20 points under the Impairment Tables.

The Tribunal affirmed the Reviewable Decision, concluding that the applicant was not eligible for a DSP during the qualification period. The Tribunal encouraged the applicant to make a new claim, noting that updated medical evidence and any new conditions could then be considered. The Tribunal also requested Services Australia to assist the applicant with a new claim, including providing relevant forms and tables to his general practitioner and specialists.