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

This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) regarding a decision by the Secretary, Department of Social Services, to refuse a Disability Support Pension. The dispute centred on whether the applicant's impairments met the threshold required for the pension. The review was conducted on the papers.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's impairment(s) attracted 20 points or more on the Impairment Tables, as required by section 94(1)(b) of the Social Security Act. This assessment required determining if the applicant's impairments were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised, a determination that necessitates corroborating evidence from a qualified medical practitioner, as self-reporting alone is insufficient.

The Tribunal noted that while the respondent accepted the applicant had impairments and satisfied section 94(1)(a) of the Act, there was a lack of direct evidence from the applicant regarding the nature and extent of his impairments, despite previous opportunities to provide it. Job Assessment Reports indicated the applicant failed to engage with assessors. Although the applicant's spinal conditions were accepted as fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, the available medical evidence, including reports from a spinal surgeon and an orthopaedic surgeon, did not establish that the applicant's impairments attracted the requisite 20 points under the Impairment Tables. Consequently, the Tribunal found the applicant did not satisfy section 94(1)(b) of the Act during the qualification period and was therefore not eligible for the Disability Support Pension. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.