Dancs and Secretary, Department of Employment

This matter concerned an application for an extension of time to seek review of a decision by the Secretary, Department of Employment, to affirm the suspension of Ms Dancs' Newstart allowance. Ms Dancs had lodged her application for review with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) on 7 October 2016, some 22 days after the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) had affirmed the Department's decision on 15 August 2016. The Secretary opposed the extension of time.

The AAT was required to determine whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant Ms Dancs an extension of time to lodge her application for review. In considering this, the Tribunal applied the principles established in *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Cohen*, which include assessing the applicant's explanation for the delay, any prejudice to the respondent, the merits of the substantive application, and considerations of fairness. The Tribunal noted that an acceptable explanation for delay is not a strict prerequisite but is generally expected.

The AAT considered Ms Dancs' explanation for the delay, which was that her computer had crashed, preventing her from accessing relevant documents. While acknowledging this difficulty, the Tribunal found that this explanation, when considered alongside the merits of the substantive application, did not satisfy the requirement for reasonableness. The Tribunal also noted the evidence regarding Ms Dancs' failure to attend a required appointment with Advanced Personnel Management (APM) and her communication difficulties with APM and the Department.

Ultimately, the AAT was not satisfied that it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant the extension of time. Accordingly, the application for an extension of time was refused.