Conway and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)
Case
•
[2020] AATA 2450
•24 July 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Conway and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2020] AATA 2450
[2020] AATA 2450
24 July 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant against a decision of the Secretary, Department of Social Services, affirming a decision that the applicant was not qualified for a Disability Support Pension (DSP). The applicant contended that her conditions of Major Depressive Disorder and Fibromyalgia were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, and should attract an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the relevant Impairment Tables, thereby qualifying her for DSP. The respondent argued that the applicant's impairments did not meet the threshold for a 20-point rating.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether, during the relevant period, the applicant had physical, intellectual, or psychiatric conditions that were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised. It also needed to assess whether these conditions warranted an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables, and if so, whether the applicant had a severe impairment or had completed a program of support. Finally, the Tribunal had to consider whether the applicant had a continuing inability to work.
The Tribunal accepted that the applicant had impairments for the purposes of the Act. However, it found that the evidence did not establish that her mental health condition, Major Depressive Disorder, was fully treated and stabilised during the relevant period. While there was evidence of ongoing psychological intervention and a psychologist's expectation of future improvement, this did not satisfy the criteria for a fully stabilised condition at that time. Consequently, the applicant's conditions could not be assigned any impairment points during the relevant period.
The applicant therefore failed to reach the required 20 points or more for DSP eligibility. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, but noted that the applicant might benefit from lodging a fresh application with more recent medical evidence if her conditions have since worsened or become fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether, during the relevant period, the applicant had physical, intellectual, or psychiatric conditions that were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised. It also needed to assess whether these conditions warranted an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables, and if so, whether the applicant had a severe impairment or had completed a program of support. Finally, the Tribunal had to consider whether the applicant had a continuing inability to work.
The Tribunal accepted that the applicant had impairments for the purposes of the Act. However, it found that the evidence did not establish that her mental health condition, Major Depressive Disorder, was fully treated and stabilised during the relevant period. While there was evidence of ongoing psychological intervention and a psychologist's expectation of future improvement, this did not satisfy the criteria for a fully stabilised condition at that time. Consequently, the applicant's conditions could not be assigned any impairment points during the relevant period.
The applicant therefore failed to reach the required 20 points or more for DSP eligibility. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, but noted that the applicant might benefit from lodging a fresh application with more recent medical evidence if her conditions have since worsened or become fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Standing
-
Statutory Construction
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Conway and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2020] AATA 2450
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
0
Re Bobera and Secretary, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
[2012] AATA 922
Dragojlovic v Director-General of Social Security
[1984] FCA 6