G.D. v AAT

G.D. sought judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) in the High Court of Australia. The dispute concerned the AAT's determination that G.D. was not entitled to a disability support pension under the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth). G.D. contended that the AAT had erred in law in its assessment of his eligibility.

The High Court was required to determine whether the AAT had correctly applied the provisions of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) concerning the assessment of a person's functional capacity and whether G.D. had a continuing inability to work. Specifically, the court considered the proper interpretation of the 'impairment tables' and the evidentiary requirements for establishing a severe impairment.

Gummow and Kirby JJ held that the AAT had made an error of law by failing to properly consider all relevant evidence regarding G.D.'s functional capacity. Their Honours emphasised that the AAT must undertake a holistic assessment of a claimant's impairments, taking into account all available medical evidence and the impact of those impairments on their ability to work. The court reiterated the principle that the AAT is not bound by the strict rules of evidence and should consider all material placed before it.

The High Court quashed the decision of the AAT and remitted the matter to the AAT for redetermination according to law.