Bunting and Secretary, Department of Social Services

[2023] AATA 1598

Bunting and Secretary, Department of Social Services [2023] AATA 1598 (12 June 2023)

Division:GENERAL DIVISION

File Number(s):      2021/6627

Re:Imogen   Bunting

APPLICANT

AndSecretary, Department of Social Services

RESPONDENT

DECISION

Tribunal:Member Lee Benjamin

Date:12 June 2023

Place:Brisbane

The application is dismissed pursuant to subsection 42A(5) of the Administrative Appeals TribunalAct 1975 (Cth).

.......................[SGD]......................

Member Lee Benjamin

Catchwords

Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act – Applicant’s failure to proceed with application, or comply with directions, within a reasonable time

Legislation

Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth)

REASONS FOR DECISION

Member Lee Benjamin

12 June 2023

1. Ms Imogen Bunting applied to the Tribunal’s General Division on 10 September 2021 for review of Centrelink’s decision to cancel her JobSeeker payment with effect from 11 May 2021.[1] In the 21 months since Ms Bunting filed her application, she has failed to proceed with her application. Accordingly, I have decided to dismiss Ms Bunting’s application under subsection 42A(5) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) for failure to proceed.

   [1] On 8 June 2021, Centrelink decided to cancel Ms Bunting’s jobseeker payment from 8 May 2021. A Centrelink authorised review officer (ARO) affirmed the decision on 29 June 2021. Later, Ms Bunting sought a review of the ARO decision in the Social Services & Child Support Division of the Tribunal (SSCSD). On 27 August 2021, the SSCSD affirmed the ARO decision. 

2. Ms Bunting’s review application has a long procedural history. The Tribunal put in place timetabling directions in November 2021, January 2022, April 2022, October 2022, February 2023 and March 2023, for the parties to file their materials. Ms Bunting has repeatedly sought and been granted extensions of time to file materials in support of her review application. However, despite the passage of time and ample opportunity, Ms Bunting has failed to file materials that are relevant and responsive to the review application and directions respectively.

3. At a case management directions hearing in March 2023, Ms Bunting indicated that she did not have legal representation and needed legal advice on her review application. In response to the same, the Tribunal arranged for a LegalAid Queensland appointment for Ms Bunting in mid-March 2023, which Ms Bunting duly attended. Separately, the Tribunal provided information to Ms Bunting on other community legal centre options for legal advice, as well as how to access legal resources.   

4. In May 2023, in anticipating of a filing deadline, Ms Bunting contacted the Tribunal seeking a further extension of time to file her materials. I declined Ms Bunting’s request for an extension. In response, Ms Bunting filed, among other things, copies of past complaint letters to government Ministers, Members of Parliament and public servants about Centrelink. In my view, these are not responsive to the Tribunal’s direction, nor are they materially relevant to the key question in the review application, being whether the decision to cancel Ms Bunting’s JobSeeker Payment from 11 May is correct or preferable.

5. In June 2023, I held a directions hearing to consider Ms Bunting’s non-compliance with the Tribunal’s directions.  At the hearing, Ms Bunting complained extensively about Centrelink. Ms Bunting was cantankerous and irascible. I explained to Ms Bunting that a review application before Tribunal is an unsuitable vehicle to ventilate her grievances about Centrelink processes and personnel. I indicated to Ms Bunting that I was considering dismissing her review application for failure to proceed. I noted that Ms Bunting had earlier been put on notice, on several occasions, about the same. I invited Ms Bunting to write to the Tribunal, and Ms Bunting did, expressing her views on this course.   

6. At this point, after six sets of Tribunal directions and nine conferences/directions hearings by telephone over 21 months, I am satisfied that Ms Bunting has had an opportunity to proceed with her application. Ms Bunting has chosen no to do so. Accordingly, I have decided to dismiss Ms Bunting’s application under subsection 42A(5) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth).

I certify that the preceding 6 (six) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of Member Lee Benjamin

.................[SGD].........................

Associate

Dated: 12 June 2023