Hasselmann and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)
Case
•
[2021] AATA 1050
•29 April 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Hasselmann and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2021] AATA 1050
[2021] AATA 1050
29 April 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter came before P. E. Nolan SM of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal concerning an application for a Disability Support Pension. The applicant sought to have his various medical conditions assessed under the relevant impairment tables to determine if he met the threshold for the pension. The Secretary of the Department of Social Services opposed the application, arguing that the applicant's conditions did not qualify for an impairment rating.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's medical conditions were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised, and whether these conditions resulted in an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011. The Tables are designed to assess functional impairment rather than the medical conditions themselves, and an impairment rating can only be assigned if a condition is permanent, meaning it is fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stable, and likely to persist for more than two years.
The Tribunal found that none of the applicant's claimed conditions met the criteria for an impairment rating. Regarding alcoholism, the applicant had self-diagnosed, and there was no evidence of diagnosis by a qualified professional or any treatment received. While a doctor noted a neurological condition potentially linked to excessive alcohol, there was no indication of treatment or stabilisation. The applicant's neck condition, though diagnosed, lacked evidence of full treatment during the qualifying period, and the applicant himself suggested it was no longer a significant issue. Other complaints, such as carpal tunnel syndrome, low back pain, knee pain, ankle pain, and gout, were considered common ailments without sufficient evidence of treatment prognosis or stabilisation to qualify as conditions preventing mobility as required by the legislation. Consequently, no points could be awarded for any of these conditions.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, concluding that the applicant did not meet the requirements for a Disability Support Pension based on the lack of fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised conditions that would attract the necessary impairment points.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's medical conditions were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised, and whether these conditions resulted in an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011. The Tables are designed to assess functional impairment rather than the medical conditions themselves, and an impairment rating can only be assigned if a condition is permanent, meaning it is fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stable, and likely to persist for more than two years.
The Tribunal found that none of the applicant's claimed conditions met the criteria for an impairment rating. Regarding alcoholism, the applicant had self-diagnosed, and there was no evidence of diagnosis by a qualified professional or any treatment received. While a doctor noted a neurological condition potentially linked to excessive alcohol, there was no indication of treatment or stabilisation. The applicant's neck condition, though diagnosed, lacked evidence of full treatment during the qualifying period, and the applicant himself suggested it was no longer a significant issue. Other complaints, such as carpal tunnel syndrome, low back pain, knee pain, ankle pain, and gout, were considered common ailments without sufficient evidence of treatment prognosis or stabilisation to qualify as conditions preventing mobility as required by the legislation. Consequently, no points could be awarded for any of these conditions.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, concluding that the applicant did not meet the requirements for a Disability Support Pension based on the lack of fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised conditions that would attract the necessary impairment points.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0