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

This matter concerned an application for Newstart allowance by Mr Chaker (the Applicant) against the Secretary, Department of Social Services (the Respondent). The dispute centred on the length of a lump sum compensation preclusion period and whether special circumstances existed to reduce it. The decision was made by Mr Chris Puplick AM, Senior Member, of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues. First, whether there were any special circumstances in the Applicant's case that warranted a departure from the standard preclusion period. Second, if special circumstances were found, whether those circumstances provided grounds to modify the length of the preclusion period.

The Tribunal reasoned that the Applicant was not in a worse financial position than many others, given the equity in his home and its increasing value due to market forces and home improvements. Consequently, it found no special circumstances to distinguish his case from others presenting similar conditions regarding the establishment of a preclusion period. However, when considering modification of the preclusion period, the Tribunal applied principles from *Riddell* and *Hales*, which emphasise a broad discretion to balance certainty with flexibility in responding to individual hardship, need, and fairness. The Tribunal took into account that the Applicant did not receive the full compensation amount used in the original calculation, and that some allowance should be made for home modifications to accommodate disabilities arising from a compensable accident. While the exact costs of disability-related modifications were not precisely ascertainable, the Tribunal notionally allowed 10% of the claimed modification costs.