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

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application by the Applicant for an extension of time to lodge an application for review. The substantive matter concerned a reduction in the Applicant's Family Tax Benefit (FTB) Part A, which was based on her son not meeting immunisation requirements. The Department of Social Services opposed the extension.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant an extension of time for the Applicant to seek review of the AAT's previous decision. This required the Tribunal to consider factors such as the length of the delay, the Applicant's awareness of her appeal rights, the explanation for the delay, the merits of the substantive application, any prejudice to the parties, and the availability of alternative avenues of relief.

The Tribunal reasoned that statutory time limits are prescribed for good reasons and should not be extended without good cause, citing the Federal Court's decision in *Selvidge v Director of Professional Services Review*. The Applicant's request for review was made almost two years after the due date, which was a significant delay. The Tribunal noted that the Applicant had been informed of her appeal rights following the initial AAT decision. While the Applicant expressed frustration and made various assertions regarding constitutional adherence and potential legal action against public servants, these did not constitute a sufficient explanation for the substantial delay in seeking review of the FTB reduction decision.

The Tribunal ultimately refused the application for an extension of time. Oral reasons were provided at the interlocutory hearing, and the Applicant subsequently requested written reasons, which were then provided.