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

This matter concerned an appeal by the Applicant against a decision to affirm the rejection of his application for a disability support pension (DSP). The Applicant had multiple medical conditions, and the dispute centred on whether these conditions met the criteria for a DSP, specifically regarding diagnosis, treatment, and stabilisation, and whether they attracted sufficient points under the relevant Impairment Tables. The case was heard by J Sosso SM in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the Applicant’s various medical conditions were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised during the relevant qualification period for the DSP. Furthermore, the Tribunal had to determine if these conditions, when assessed against the Impairment Tables, attracted the requisite number of points to qualify the Applicant for the pension. The Tribunal also considered the temporal aspect of the conditions, referencing the principle that subsequent progression of a condition after the initial application cannot be used to directly award a DSP.

The Tribunal's reasoning acknowledged that the Respondent accepted the Applicant had impairments satisfying section 94(1)(a) of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth). The Respondent also accepted the Applicant's spinal condition was diagnosed, treated, and stabilised during the qualification period, and that Table 4 (Spinal Function) was the appropriate table for its assessment. Evidence from an orthopaedic surgeon indicated the spinal condition was an aggravation of lumbar spondylosis, supported by imaging and a functional assessment. However, the Tribunal noted that if a condition has progressed significantly since the original DSP application, the applicant should make a new application, as the Tribunal cannot use evidence of such progression to award a DSP based on changed circumstances.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review. The Tribunal expressed hope that the Applicant would continue with his medical treatment and indicated that if the diagnosis of a particular condition could be corroborated by further evidence, he would be at liberty to make a new application for the DSP.