Harding and Secretary, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Social services second review)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Harding for a review of decisions by the Secretary, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, to cancel her Jobseeker payment. The dispute arose from a finding by a delegate of the Secretary that Ms Harding had failed to sign a Jobseeker Employment Pathway Plan when requested by an employee of Jobs Statewide. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the application to dismiss the review, which was declined.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Ms Harding had committed a mutual obligation failure by not entering into a Jobseeker Employment Pathway Plan as required, and whether the subsequent cancellation of her payment was made in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Administration Act). Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if Ms Harding had complied with the requirements to enter into a plan, and if a mutual obligation failure had occurred, whether the cancellation of her payment followed the correct procedure, including the imposition and compliance with a reconnection requirement.

The Tribunal reasoned that while Ms Harding was required to enter into a Jobseeker Employment Pathway Plan, and her failure to do so constituted a mutual obligation failure, the subsequent cancellation of her payment was not made in accordance with the Administration Act. The Act stipulated that a payment could be cancelled if a reconnection requirement was not complied with within four weeks of a suspension notice. In this instance, Ms Harding's payment was cancelled less than four weeks after the suspension notice. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that Ms Harding had complied with the reconnection requirement by contacting her employment services provider within the specified timeframe.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the power to cancel Ms Harding's payment under s 42AM(4) of the Administration Act did not arise. The decisions under review were therefore set aside.