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

This matter concerned the review of a decision to cancel Mrs Jasminka Kuljanin's disability support pension (DSP). The applicant had been in receipt of the DSP since 2008 due to chronic spine pain, shoulder and elbow pain, and depression. Following a review for indefinite portability of her pension, Centrelink cancelled her DSP on the basis that she did not meet the required impairment rating. The former Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) had previously varied this decision, finding a continuing inability to work, but the Secretary disagreed with the SSAT's impairment rating for the applicant's upper limb condition. The applicant maintained that her conditions, particularly her depression, warranted a higher impairment rating.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mrs Kuljanin was qualified to receive the DSP as at 6 August 2014, the date of cancellation. This involved assessing the appropriate impairment ratings for her spinal, upper limb, and mental health conditions under the relevant tables of the Social Security Act 1991. The core legal issue was whether the applicant's combined impairments reached the threshold for DSP eligibility, particularly considering the Secretary's contention that the upper limb impairment rating should be lower than that determined by the SSAT.

The Tribunal accepted the SSAT's assessment of a 10-point impairment rating for the applicant's spine condition under Table 4, finding no evidence to support a higher rating. Regarding her upper limb function, the Tribunal considered the evidence, including the applicant's reported ability to perform certain household tasks and drive for limited periods, and concluded that a 5-point impairment rating under Table 2 was appropriate, aligning with the initial job capacity assessment and the Secretary's submission, rather than the 10 points awarded by the SSAT. The Tribunal noted that the applicant's mental health condition was considered by medical professionals to be serious and chronic, with symptoms fluctuating in response to stressors, and that while some reports suggested stability, others indicated significant adaptation issues in Australia. The Tribunal found that the applicant's spinal and upper limb conditions, assessed at 10 and 5 points respectively, did not, in combination with the mental health condition, result in a severe impairment rating of 20 points or more.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Mrs Kuljanin was not qualified to receive the DSP as at 6 August 2014. The decision of the SSAT was set aside, and the original decision to cancel the DSP was affirmed.