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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Griffith against the decision of the Social Services & Child Support Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which affirmed the cancellation of his Disability Support Pension (DSP). The cancellation was based on the finding that Mr Griffith no longer met the medical eligibility criteria under s 94 of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth). The dispute centred on whether Mr Griffith's various medical conditions were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised (FDTS) at the date of cancellation, and whether the resulting impairments attracted the requisite number of points under the Impairment Tables to qualify for DSP.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mr Griffith's impairments attracted 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables at the date of cancellation, and consequently, whether he had a continuing inability to work. The Tribunal was required to consider the evidence regarding Mr Griffith's right shoulder condition, hearing loss, psychological condition, gastrointestinal dysfunction, and left knee condition, and assess whether these conditions met the FDTS criteria as defined by the Rules for applying the Impairment Tables.

The Tribunal reasoned that for a condition to be considered FDTS, treatment must be reasonably accessible, have a high success rate, be available at a reasonable cost, be regularly undertaken, and reliably expected to result in substantial improvement. Applying these principles, the Tribunal was satisfied that Mr Griffith's right shoulder condition was FDTS at the cancellation date, attracting 10 points under Table 2. However, the Tribunal found that while his psychological condition was fully diagnosed, it was not fully treated and stabilised. Furthermore, his gastrointestinal dysfunction, hearing loss, and left knee condition were not considered fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised. Consequently, the total impairment points for Mr Griffith did not reach the threshold of 20 points required for DSP eligibility.

As the Tribunal found that Mr Griffith did not qualify for DSP based on the impairment points, it did not address the separate issue of whether he had a continuing inability to work. Therefore, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel Mr Griffith's DSP.