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

This matter concerned an application by Mrs Foryabee for an extension of time to seek review of a decision made by the Social Services & Child Support Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Mrs Foryabee had been granted a Carer Payment and Carer Allowance for providing care to Mrs Sima Mohammed Zayee. However, a Centrelink officer subsequently raised a debt of $15,511.29 for overpayments of these payments between 26 September 2016 and 18 July 2017. An internal review affirmed this decision, finding that Mrs Foryabee was not providing the required level of daily personal care due to her part-time care arrangements and the commencement of a Family Day Care business. Mrs Foryabee sought a review of this decision on 13 July 2020, over two years after the internal review decision, citing a lack of legal knowledge, a language barrier, and misinterpretation of facts.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to extend the time for Mrs Foryabee to make an application for review under section 29(7) of the relevant Act. This required the Tribunal to consider the principles governing the exercise of its discretion to grant such extensions, particularly in light of the significant delay in lodging the application. The Tribunal was guided by the principles established in *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd; Anthony Neary Walker; Mende Brown v the Honourable Barry Cohen Minister of Home Affairs and Environment* (1984) 3 FCR 433, which indicate that while no specific criteria are set out, an applicant must be positively satisfied that it is proper to grant an extension. This involves considering an acceptable explanation for the delay and whether it is fair and equitable to extend time, without ignoring the prescribed period for review.

The Tribunal acknowledged Mrs Foryabee's stated reasons for the delay, including a lack of legal knowledge and a language barrier. However, it also noted that Mrs Foryabee had other avenues for seeking redress. Ultimately, the Tribunal refused to exercise its discretion under section 29(7) of the Act, finding that it was not reasonable in all the circumstances to grant the extension of time. Consequently, the application for an extension of time to lodge an application for review was refused.