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

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant, Mr Ljuca, against a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services. The applicant, who had previously worked as a self-employed painter, claimed to be suffering from a left knee condition, a lower back injury, and depression. The Department accepted that these conditions existed and satisfied section 94(1)(a) of the relevant Act, but contended that they could not be considered permanent and therefore an impairment rating could not be assigned. This was because, according to the Department's primary submission, the conditions were not fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised during the qualification period, as mandated by section 6(4) of the Impairment Tables.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant's medical conditions met the criteria for permanent impairment under the Impairment Tables, specifically whether they were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised within the relevant qualification period. The applicant had sustained a left knee injury in 2010, requiring multiple surgeries, and a lower back injury in 2017. He also claimed to have suffered depression since around 2010, attributing it to personal circumstances and the ongoing effects of his physical injuries.

The Tribunal considered the medical evidence and submissions presented. Regarding the left knee condition, the evidence showed ongoing review and treatment, including multiple surgical interventions. An MRI conducted during the qualification period indicated a meniscal tear and arthritis, with a retracted semitendinosus tendon. An orthopaedic surgeon suggested further surgical intervention, but the applicant needed time to consider this, and further imaging was required before decisions could be made. The Tribunal concluded that each of the applicant's conditions were not fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised during the qualification period. Consequently, the conditions could not be assessed under the Impairment Tables, and the applicant's claim did not satisfy the requirements of section 94(1) of the Act. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.