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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Troy Ellis against the decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) to affirm the cancellation of his Mobility Allowance. Mr Ellis had been diagnosed with Becker’s Muscular Dystrophy and Bipolar Affective Disorder, conditions which resulted in significant mobility restrictions and interpersonal difficulties. He had been granted Mobility Allowance in March 2014 based on his participation in vocational training with Communicare Inc. However, he ceased attending this program in November 2014 and was formally exited from it in December 2014. Centrelink subsequently advised Mr Ellis that his Mobility Allowance would be cancelled from March 2015, as he had not been involved in work-related training, work, or voluntary work for more than 12 weeks.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Ellis continued to qualify for Mobility Allowance after 9 December 2014, specifically whether his engagement in vocational training, work, or voluntary activities met the requirements for continued entitlement. This involved determining if his subsequent activities, including self-employment as a writer and filmmaker, design of children's toys, lobbying, and association with the Lions Club, constituted gainful employment or vocational training sufficient to maintain his eligibility for the allowance. The Tribunal also considered the policy advice contained in the Guide to Social Security Law, as permitted by the principles in *Drake v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs* [1979] 2 ALD 60.

The Tribunal found that Mr Ellis's entitlement to Mobility Allowance was contingent on his participation in vocational training, work, or voluntary activities for at least 32 hours over a four-week period. It was established that he last attended his vocational training program with Communicare Inc on 25 November 2014 and was exited from the program on 9 December 2014. While Mr Ellis claimed to be engaged in various self-employment and lobbying activities, the Tribunal noted that his writing and filmmaking business had not earned any income and did not have an Australian Business Number. His voluntary work with the Department of Parks and Wildlife had ceased due to a bullying issue and was described as being "in hiatus." The Tribunal concluded that Mr Ellis had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that he was undertaking activities that met the threshold for continued entitlement to the Mobility Allowance after his exit from the Communicare program. The Tribunal affirmed the SSAT's decision.