Morante v SA Superannution Board

The High Court of Australia considered the appeal of Mr Morante against a decision of the Supreme Court of South Australia, which had affirmed a determination by the SA Superannuation Board. The dispute concerned the Board's refusal to grant Mr Morante an invalidity pension under the *Superannuation Act 1988* (SA). Mr Morante contended that he was permanently incapacitated for work due to a psychiatric condition, thereby entitling him to the pension.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether Mr Morante's psychiatric condition constituted a permanent incapacity for work within the meaning of the *Superannuation Act 1988* (SA). This required the Court to consider the proper interpretation of "incapacity for work" and "permanent" in the context of the Act, and to assess whether the evidence presented supported a finding of such incapacity.

The High Court, in allowing the appeal, reasoned that the Supreme Court had erred in its assessment of Mr Morante's condition. Their Honours found that the Board and the Supreme Court had placed undue emphasis on Mr Morante's ability to perform certain limited tasks, rather than considering his overall capacity to engage in gainful employment. The Court clarified that "incapacity for work" does not require a complete inability to perform any work whatsoever, but rather an inability to perform the work that the person is reasonably capable of performing by reason of their training, qualifications, and experience. Furthermore, the Court found that the evidence, when properly considered, indicated that Mr Morante's psychiatric condition was of a permanent nature, meaning it was unlikely to improve to the extent that he could return to gainful employment. The High Court therefore ordered that Mr Morante be granted the invalidity pension.