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

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a disability support pension and the Secretary of the Department of Social Services. The central dispute concerned whether the applicant's mental health conditions were sufficiently diagnosed, treated, and stabilised during the relevant qualification period to attract a total impairment rating of 20 points under the Impairment Tables.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues: first, whether the applicant's mental health conditions were fully diagnosed by appropriately qualified medical practitioners during the qualification period; and second, if so, whether these impairments attracted a total rating of 20 points under the Impairment Tables, thereby establishing eligibility for the disability support pension.

The Tribunal reasoned that the Introduction to Table 5 of the Impairment Tables mandates that a diagnosis of a mental health condition must be made by a psychiatrist or an appropriately qualified medical practitioner with evidence from a clinical psychologist. The evidence before the Tribunal indicated that the applicant's treating general practitioner, Dr. Verghese, was not a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist. While Dr. Ali had extensive experience in psychiatry, his qualifications and Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency registration restricted him to practicing at a non-specialist level, and he had not completed the formal training for fellowship with the College of Psychiatrists. Furthermore, Ms. Jafri, a registered psychologist, was not a clinical psychologist. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant's mental health conditions were not fully diagnosed by practitioners meeting the required qualifications during the qualification period. As a result, no impairment rating could be assigned under Table 5, and the applicant was not eligible for the disability support pension. The Tribunal affirmed the reviewable decision, noting that the applicant could make a new claim once the necessary investigations and treatment were completed and certified by appropriately qualified professionals.