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

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Secretary, Department of Social Services, to refuse a Disability Support Pension (DSP). The applicant, Mr Steven Michaelides, represented himself, while the respondent was represented by Ms Gillian Gehrke. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), presided over by Senior Member B. Pola, heard the application in Brisbane on 19 January 2021.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant qualified for a DSP during the relevant "Qualification Period," specifically whether their impairments met the criteria under section 94(1)(a) of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) and, if so, whether these impairments resulted in a score of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables as required by section 94(1)(b). The Tribunal was required to consider only impairments that were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised during the Qualification Period, or evidence referable to that period.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant suffered from impairments during the Qualification Period, including a spinal condition and sleep apnoea, there was insufficient evidence to establish that their stated conditions of hypothyroidism and depression met the necessary diagnostic and treatment criteria. Specifically, there was a lack of medical evidence corroborating the mental health condition prior to or during the Qualification Period, and no information regarding prognosis, treatment, permanence, or likelihood of existing for more than two years for these conditions. Consequently, these conditions could not be considered for the DSP application.

Given the lack of sufficient evidence for the hypothyroidism and depression, and the inability to assess their impact under the Impairment Tables, the Tribunal affirmed the original decision of the Social Services and Child Support Division dated 13 February 2020. The Tribunal concluded that it was unnecessary to consider section 94(1)(c) of the Act.