FNPQ and LFHF; Secretary, Department of Social Services and (Social services second review)

This matter concerned the cancellation of age pensions and the refusal of new claims for an age pension for Ms X and Mr Y. The dispute arose from the Secretary's assessment of their ordinary income, specifically concerning the attribution of employment income received as a lump sum payment. The case was heard by K Millar SM.

The legal issues before the court were whether the age pensions of Ms X and Mr Y should have been cancelled and whether their new claims for an age pension should have been granted. These questions hinged on the correct interpretation and application of the provisions of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) concerning the calculation of ordinary income, particularly the attribution of lump sum employment payments under section 1073A, and whether such attribution resulted in a nil rate of pension.

The court considered the purpose and object of the *Social Security Act 1991* and the principle that the interpretation best achieving the Act's purpose should be preferred. It examined section 1073A, which deals with the attribution of employment income received as a lump sum. The court noted that under this section, such income is taken to have been received over a specified period, and for members of a couple, it is attributed on a 50/50 basis. The court found that while Ms X had received a lump sum payment for a past period, the Secretary did not suggest that this attribution, when calculated on a daily basis and shared between the couple, resulted in a nil rate of pension for either Ms X or Mr Y.

The court affirmed the decisions under review, meaning the cancellation of Ms X and Mr Y's age pensions and the refusal of their new claims were upheld. This outcome indicates that the court found the Secretary's assessment of their pension rates, including the attribution of the lump sum payment, to be correct in a manner that led to the cancellation or refusal of their pensions.