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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Corstens against a decision of the Secretary of the Department of Social Services (DSS) regarding his eligibility for the age pension. Mr Corstens sought to be treated as not being a member of a couple for the purposes of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) (the Act), despite living with another person. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) had previously affirmed the Secretary's decision to treat Mr Corstens as a member of a couple. The appeal was heard by Senior Member Britten-Jones.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether there were "special circumstances" that warranted treating Mr Corstens as not being a member of a couple, notwithstanding the factual circumstances suggesting he was. This required an examination of the definition of a "couple" under the Act and the criteria for establishing such special circumstances. The Tribunal had to consider whether the existing relationship and living arrangements fell outside the ordinary contemplation of the legislative provisions, necessitating an exception.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the interpretation of "special circumstances" as requiring something beyond the ordinary or usual. It noted that the purpose of the couple provisions in the Act is to ensure that individuals in a relationship are treated as a unit for pension purposes. While acknowledging Mr Corstens's desire to be assessed individually, the Tribunal found that the evidence did not demonstrate circumstances that were so exceptional or unusual as to justify departing from the general rule. The Tribunal ultimately concluded that the circumstances presented did not meet the threshold for "special circumstances" as contemplated by the Act, and therefore Mr Corstens was correctly treated as a member of a couple.