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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Brawn against a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services regarding his eligibility for the age pension. The central dispute revolved around whether Mr Brawn should be treated as a member of a couple for the purposes of the Social Security Act 1991, which would result in a lower pension rate. The appeal was heard by Ms A F Cunningham, Senior Member.

The legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there was a "special reason" in Mr Brawn's particular case to exercise the discretion under section 24 of the Social Security Act 1991 to treat him as not being a member of a couple. This discretion is available when a person is legally married but not living separately and apart from their spouse on a permanent or indefinite basis. The Tribunal was required to determine if Mr Brawn's circumstances met the threshold for such an exercise of discretion.

The Tribunal reasoned that the discretion under section 24 should only be exercised where it would be unjust or unreasonable not to do so, and that "special reason" implies circumstances that are unusual, uncommon, abnormal, or exceptional. Mr Brawn argued that financial hardship and the need for biannual medical treatment in Australia constituted a special reason. However, the Tribunal found that the evidence of financial hardship was not sufficiently substantiated and lacked corroborating documentation. Furthermore, there was no persuasive evidence that comparable medical treatment was unavailable in Vietnam. The Tribunal noted that Mr Brawn and his wife had significant combined income and had purchased property in Vietnam, indicating a level of financial stability that did not meet the criteria for exceptional circumstances.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that Mr Brawn had not demonstrated a special reason to be treated as not being a member of a couple under section 24 of the Act.