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

This matter concerned an appeal by the Secretary, Department of Social Services, against a decision to grant a Disability Support Pension (DSP) to the respondent. The respondent claimed DSP based on a diagnosis of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), along with other related conditions. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the respondent's CFS met the criteria of being fully diagnosed, fully treated, and stabilised (FDTS) as required by the Social Security Act 1991 and the relevant Impairment Tables.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the respondent's CFS was fully diagnosed, fully treated, and stabilised as at the date of his DSP claim or within the subsequent qualification period. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the respondent's condition satisfied the requirements of Schedule 2 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 and clause 6 of the relevant Determination, which outline the criteria for a condition to be considered FDTS. This involved assessing the corroborating evidence, the treatment undertaken, and the likelihood of functional improvement with further treatment.

The Tribunal found that the respondent's CFS was not fully treated and stabilised as at the date of his claim or during the qualification period. While the respondent had engaged in various treatments, including infrared sauna, coffee enemas, supplementation, lymphatic drainage massage, and following the "Shoemaker" protocol, the Tribunal was not satisfied that these treatments, in conjunction with the medical advice received, indicated that further reasonable treatment was unlikely to result in significant functional improvement enabling the respondent to undertake work within the next two years. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the respondent did not satisfy the requirements of sections 94(1)(b) and (c) of the Social Security Act 1991.

The Tribunal set aside the decision under review and, in substitution, determined that the respondent was not eligible to receive the Disability Support Pension because he had not satisfied the necessary legislative criteria regarding the stabilisation of his condition.