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

[2018] AATA 3934

Kostidis and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2018] AATA 3934 (3 September 2018)

Division:GENERAL DIVISION

File Number(s):      2018/1012

Re:Irene Kostidis

APPLICANT

AndSecretary, Department of Social Services

RESPONDENT

DECISION

Tribunal:Dr Damien Cremean, Senior Member

Date of decision:                   3 September 2018

Date of written reasons:        19 October 2018

Place:Melbourne

For the reasons given orally at the conclusion of the hearing, the Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

[sgd]........................................................................

Dr Damien Cremean, Senior Member

Catchwords

SOCIAL SECURITY – disability support pension – insufficient evidence – section 94(1)(b) not satisfied – section 94(1)(c) not satisfied – decision affirmed

Legislation

Social Security Act 1991 (Cth)

Secondary Materials

Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011

REASONS FOR DECISION

Dr Damien Cremean, Senior Member

19 October 2018

1. The Applicant has requested written reasons for the decision in the matter I decided on     3 September 2018.

2. On that occasion I gave an oral decision and my reasons for the decision following the hearing because the Applicant expressly wanted a decision on the day.

3. The Applicant applied to review a decision of the Social Services and Child Support Division of this Tribunal (AAT1) given on 30 January 2018. The AAT1 decision affirmed a decision of a Centrelink Authorised Review Officer rejecting her claim for disability support pension (DSP) made on 13 January 2017.

4. The Applicant gave sworn evidence at the hearing but called no witnesses; although the Tribunal did hear from the Applicant’s husband, Mr Kostidis.

5. There was nothing presented to the Tribunal at the hearing which gave reason to alter the decision under review.

6. Qualification for DSP arises under section 94 (1) of the Social Security Act 1991(Cth) (the Act).

7. The Applicant satisfied section 94(1)(a) of the Act in that she had a physical, intellectual or psychiatric impairment.

8. The Applicant did not satisfy section 94(1)(b) of the Act in that it could not be determined that she had an impairment 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). To be considered under those Tables the Applicant’s conditions (or impairments) must have been fully investigated, treated and stabilised within 13 weeks of the date she made the claim — that is, by 14 April 2017.  None of the Applicant’s conditions met this criterion as was explained to her.

9. Nor did the Applicant satisfy section 94(1)(c) of the Act in that there was nothing to show that within the relevant period she had a continuing inability to work and she had not participated in a program of support.

10. Accordingly, the Applicant’s application for review failed because of her failure to satisfy either section 94(1)(b) or section 94(1)(c) of the Act.

11. As a result, I affirm the decision under review.

I certify that the preceding 11 (eleven) paragraphs are a true copy of the written  reasons for the decision herein of Dr Damien Cremean, Senior Member

[sgd]........................................................................

Associate

Dated: 19 October 2018

Date(s) of hearing:	3 September 2018
Applicant:	In person
Advocate for the Respondent:	Vincci Chan