Dancs and Secretary, Department of Employment

This matter concerned an application for an extension of time to lodge an application for review of a decision by the Secretary, Department of Employment, to suspend Ms Dancs' newstart allowance. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant this extension.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Ms Dancs had provided an acceptable explanation for the 22-day delay in lodging her application for review, and whether it was fair and equitable to grant an extension, considering the merits of her substantive application and any prejudice to the respondent. The Tribunal was guided by the principles established in *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Cohen*, which require consideration of the explanation for delay, the applicant's conduct, prejudice to the respondent, and the merits of the underlying application.

The Tribunal considered Ms Dancs' explanation that her computer had crashed, preventing her from accessing documents and making her unsure of how to proceed. However, it also noted the Secretary's submissions regarding Ms Dancs' failure to attend a mandatory appointment with Advanced Personnel Management (APM) and her subsequent communication with APM and the Department. While Ms Dancs contended she had notified APM of her inability to attend due to a medical appointment, the Tribunal found that this notification may not have been received by APM. Ultimately, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the explanation for the delay, when considered alongside all other circumstances, rendered it reasonable to grant the extension of time.

The application for an extension of time was refused.