Moore and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)
Case
•
[2017] AATA 1590
•28 September 2017
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Moore and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2017] AATA 1590
[2017] AATA 1590
28 September 2017
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Moore against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which affirmed a decision of the Department of Social Services to reject her application for a Disability Support Pension (DSP). The core of the dispute revolved around whether Ms Moore's various medical conditions met the criteria for a DSP, specifically whether they were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, and whether they resulted in a sufficient level of impairment.
The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Ms Moore's claimed conditions, including a brain injury, mental health condition, spine condition, and urological condition, were "fully diagnosed, fully treated and fully stabilised" as required by the Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011. This determination dictates that for an impairment to be considered permanent and eligible for points under the Impairment Tables, it must meet these specific criteria, and be more likely than not to persist for two years.
The Tribunal reasoned that for a condition to be considered "fully diagnosed and fully treated," there must be corroborating evidence, evidence of treatment or rehabilitation, and a plan for ongoing or future treatment. Furthermore, a condition is "fully stabilised" if reasonable treatment has been undertaken and no significant functional improvement enabling work is expected, or if no reasonable treatment has been undertaken but no significant functional improvement is expected even with treatment, or if there is a compelling reason not to undertake treatment. Applying these principles, the Tribunal found that Ms Moore had not met the requirements for her claimed conditions to be considered fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised as at the date of her claim. Consequently, her conditions could not be considered permanent for the purposes of the Impairment Tables, and she did not qualify for the DSP.
The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Ms Moore's claimed conditions, including a brain injury, mental health condition, spine condition, and urological condition, were "fully diagnosed, fully treated and fully stabilised" as required by the Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011. This determination dictates that for an impairment to be considered permanent and eligible for points under the Impairment Tables, it must meet these specific criteria, and be more likely than not to persist for two years.
The Tribunal reasoned that for a condition to be considered "fully diagnosed and fully treated," there must be corroborating evidence, evidence of treatment or rehabilitation, and a plan for ongoing or future treatment. Furthermore, a condition is "fully stabilised" if reasonable treatment has been undertaken and no significant functional improvement enabling work is expected, or if no reasonable treatment has been undertaken but no significant functional improvement is expected even with treatment, or if there is a compelling reason not to undertake treatment. Applying these principles, the Tribunal found that Ms Moore had not met the requirements for her claimed conditions to be considered fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised as at the date of her claim. Consequently, her conditions could not be considered permanent for the purposes of the Impairment Tables, and she did not qualify for the DSP.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Moore and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2017] AATA 1590
Most Recent Citation
Simmonds and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2018] AATA 3194
Cases Citing This Decision
1
Cases Cited
1
Statutory Material Cited
0
Re Fanning and Secretary, Department of Social Services
[2014] AATA 447