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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mrs Ioapo against a decision of the Secretary of the Department of Social Services affirming a refusal to grant her a Disability Support Pension (DSP). The appeal was heard by Senior Member D. J. Morris of the Tribunal. The core of the dispute revolved around whether Mrs Ioapo met the qualification criteria for the DSP, specifically concerning the assessment of her medical impairments under the relevant Impairment Tables and the Social Security Act 1991.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mrs Ioapo’s impairments were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised within the relevant qualification period, and whether these impairments, when assessed against the Impairment Tables, resulted in a sufficient point score to qualify for the DSP. The Tribunal was required to determine if Mrs Ioapo had a continuing inability to work, as defined by the Act, and to consider the specific meaning of "permanent" as defined in the Impairment Tables Determination, which requires conditions to be fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised with no likely functional improvement within two years.

The Tribunal reasoned that to qualify for DSP, a claimant must satisfy several criteria, including having an impairment of 20 or more points under the Impairment Tables. The assessment of whether a condition was "permanent" for the purposes of the Determination required it to be fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised. While the Tribunal found that Mrs Ioapo's shoulder condition might meet these criteria, it ultimately assigned a zero-point impairment rating for this condition after applying the descriptors in Table 2 of the Determination. Regarding her spinal condition, the Tribunal noted that the medical evidence did not conclusively establish that it was fully diagnosed within the qualification period. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Mrs Ioapo had not met the threshold of 20 or more impairment points, rendering it unnecessary to consider the further requirement of a continuing inability to work.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Secretary, finding that Mrs Ioapo did not qualify for the Disability Support Pension as she had not been assigned the requisite 20 or more impairment points under the Impairment Tables. The Tribunal clarified that the meaning of "permanent" in this context was a specific legal definition and did not imply that the claimant did not suffer from her conditions, but rather that the preconditions for assessment under the DSP qualification rules had not been met within the relevant timeframe.