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

This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant against a decision of the Secretary, Department of Social Services, regarding a compensation preclusion period for a disability support pension (blind pension). The applicant sought to have the whole or part of a compensation payment disregarded under section 1184K of the relevant Act, arguing that special circumstances existed.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's circumstances were "special" within the meaning of section 1184K of the Act, such that it would be appropriate to treat the whole or part of the compensation payment as not having been made. This required the Tribunal to identify any circumstances it found to be special, explain why it considered them special, and then explain why, in light of those circumstances, it was appropriate to disregard the compensation payment.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's extensive medical history, including blindness in one eye, partial vision in the other which was further compromised by an assault, spinal injuries from motor vehicle accidents, deafness, balance issues, panic attacks, and depression. The applicant also detailed the severe injuries sustained in a catastrophic motor vehicle accident in 2014. However, the Tribunal found that the evidence did not support the exercise of discretion to disregard the compensation payment. This was because the applicant possessed substantial capital assets, including significant equity in his home, and was not in straitened financial circumstances, continuing to receive rental income and maintain an interest in a business. Furthermore, there was no evidence of personal hardship during the preclusion period, such as an inability to access medical treatment or a risk of losing property, nor any evidence of unfairness in the application of the preclusion period by Centrelink. The Tribunal also noted that while the applicant suffered multiple ailments, he was still able to function and lead a relatively normal life, and his circumstances were not exceptional or uncommon when compared to other recipients of the blind DSP subject to the preclusion period.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.