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

This matter concerned a review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning social security benefits paid to Mr Hewawasam Revulge. The Secretary of the Department of Social Services sought to recover overpayments of special benefit, Austudy, and Student Start-up Scholarship payments made to Mr Revulge between February 2009 and September 2014. The core of the dispute was Mr Revulge's alleged failure to disclose income received from various sources to Centrelink during these periods, which resulted in the overpayments. The decision was made by Senior Member Egon Fice.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mr Revulge had failed to disclose income from North-West Investments and Memphis Corporation, and whether income derived from his legal practice, Trans Advisory International (TAI) Lawyers, and TAI Migration Lawyers, should have been declared to Centrelink. The Tribunal was also required to determine if any provisions existed for waiving the debt owed to the Commonwealth, either mandatorily or at the discretion of the Secretary, given the circumstances.

The Tribunal found that Mr Revulge had failed to disclose income from North-West Investments and Memphis Corporation, rejecting his submissions that the amounts did not exceed disclosure limitations or that he was unaware of the entities. Regarding his legal practice, TAI Lawyers, the Tribunal noted its registration as a sole trader and the corporate entity Trans Advisory International Pty Ltd, of which Mr Revulge was a director and Public Officer. Evidence of regular deposits described as "Legal Fees" or "Law Fees" into his business accounts, ranging from $500 to $3,500, indicated income from legal services that should have been declared. The Tribunal concluded that these overpayments constituted a debt owed to the Commonwealth. It further determined that the circumstances did not meet the criteria for mandatory waiver under section 1237AAD of the Social Security Act, as the debt resulted from Mr Revulge's failure to comply with the Act. The Secretary's discretion to waive the debt was also not enlivened as the debt arose from a failure to disclose.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the AAT's decision that the special benefit, Austudy, and Student Start-up Scholarship payments made to Mr Revulge were payments to which he was not entitled. The decision made by AAT 1 on 14 October 2016 was therefore affirmed.