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

This matter concerned an appeal by the Secretary, Department of Social Services, against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning a claim for a disability support pension (DSP). The applicant, Mr Horner, had claimed DSP based on a range of conditions including fibromyalgia, a gastroenterological condition, a mental health condition, and vertigo. The central dispute revolved around the relevant period for assessing Mr Horner's qualification for the DSP, specifically whether his impairment rating met the threshold of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables.

The legal issues before the court were whether the AAT had erred in its assessment of Mr Horner's qualification for DSP by considering evidence that extended beyond the initial claim date and the subsequent 13-week period. The court was required to determine the correct interpretation of clause 4(1) of Schedule 2 to the *Social Security Administration Act 1999* (Cth) and its application to the assessment of eligibility for DSP. This involved considering whether medical evidence generated after the qualification period could be used to establish eligibility for DSP based on circumstances existing within that period.

The court affirmed the AAT's decision, applying the principles established in *Bobera* and *Fanning*, which were also cited with approval in *Gallacher*. The court reasoned that a person's qualification for DSP is to be assessed as at the date of claim and during the ensuing 13 weeks. While medical evidence dated outside this period may be relevant, it is only admissible to the extent that it refers to the claimant's condition and impairments during the relevant qualification period. If a claimant's condition has progressed or deteriorated after this period, the appropriate course is to lodge a fresh claim, rather than seeking to rely on post-qualification evidence to establish eligibility for the original claim.