Curtis-Smith v Secretary, Department of Social Services

Curtis-Smith sought to appeal a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which had found that she was not entitled to an age pension under the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth). The appellant had applied for the pension after relocating to the Philippines. The AAT had determined that she did not meet the residency requirements under the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) s 7. The appellant argued that she should be granted an exception to the general rule set out in the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) s 29.

The legal issues before the court were whether the AAT had correctly applied the law in determining that the appellant was not an Australian resident and whether the appellant was entitled to an exception under s 29 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth). The court had to consider the criteria for determining Australian residency under s 7 of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) and whether the appellant met the requirements for an exception under s 29 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth).

The court found that the AAT had properly applied the law in determining that the appellant did not meet the requirements for residency under s 7 of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth). The court also found that the appellant's argument for an exception under s 29 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) was misconceived. The court held that the AAT had not erred in law and that the appellant did not meet the requirements for an exception. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

The orders of the court were that the appeal be dismissed with costs. The entry of orders is governed by Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.