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

This matter concerned the Administrative Appeals Tribunal's review of decisions made by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services regarding the overpayment of social security benefits. The primary dispute revolved around whether the applicant and Mr. Ghazi Haddara were to be considered a couple for the purposes of social security legislation during various periods between 2011 and 2020. This determination was crucial for recalculating the applicant's entitlements and any debts owed to the Commonwealth.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant and Mr. Haddara were members of a couple during specific periods relevant to the assessment of social security payments. This involved examining the nature of their relationship, including periods of separation and reconciliation, and considering the impact of their interactions on the calculation of social security debts. The Tribunal was required to apply the provisions of the *Social Security Act 1991*, the *Social Security (Administration) Act 1999*, and the *A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999*.

The Tribunal considered extensive evidence, including oral testimony from the applicant and Mr. Haddara, and documentary evidence. The applicant described a long-term, albeit "chaotic," on-again-off-again relationship with Mr. Haddara, marked by frequent breakups due to his alcohol abuse, but also by continued contact, shared holidays, the birth of four children, and Mr. Haddara's contributions to mortgage repayments and vehicle provision. Despite periods of separation, the applicant maintained that they presented as a couple to their families and socially. The Tribunal noted that Mr. Haddara had been assessed as owing a significant debt due to being treated as a couple with the applicant, a decision that had been affirmed by an authorised review officer and subsequently by the Tribunal in a prior decision. The Tribunal determined that a joint hearing of the applicant's review and Mr. Haddara's related application was appropriate due to the common issue of their couple status.

The Tribunal affirmed some of the Secretary's decisions, varied others, and set aside and remitted some with directions for recalculation. The specific outcome for each decision was detailed in the full judgment.