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

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an appeal by Mr Hyde against a decision by the Secretary, Department of Social Services, to affirm a determination that he was not eligible for a Disability Support Pension. The dispute centred on whether Mr Hyde's lower back condition was sufficiently severe to meet the eligibility criteria for the pension, specifically by reaching a threshold of 20 points under the relevant assessment tables.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine the extent of Mr Hyde's functional impairment due to his back condition during the claim period, and whether the evidence presented, including that from lay witnesses, was sufficient to establish that his condition prevented him from working. This involved assessing the credibility and relevance of contradictory evidence regarding his mobility and ability to perform daily activities, particularly in relation to the descriptors in the Social Security Act 1991 assessment tables.

The Tribunal acknowledged Mr Hyde's significant disability and the impact on his daily activities, noting that his condition could broadly be considered to render him unable to work. However, it found that some evidence required caution, particularly concerning the relevance of contemporary evidence to the claim period. While lay witnesses, including his former partner and a friend, provided evidence corroborating Mr Hyde's difficulties with mobility and daily tasks, the Tribunal also noted discrepancies between his account and medical evidence, and a potential deterioration in his mobility over time. The Tribunal rejected the Secretary's submission that lay witness evidence could not constitute corroborating evidence of impairment, finding that the relevant tables explicitly allowed for such evidence. Despite this, the Tribunal ultimately affirmed the decision, indicating that the evidence, when considered as a whole, did not establish that Mr Hyde's condition was sufficient to reach the required 20 points under the assessment tables.