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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Morrow against the cancellation of his Disability Support Pension (DSP) by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services. The central dispute revolved around whether Mr Morrow's various medical conditions, including a spinal condition, bilateral ankle injuries, mental health issues, and a fixed flexion finger deformity, met the criteria for DSP qualification under the Social Security Act 1991. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was tasked with determining if these impairments, when considered together, amounted to at least 20 points under the Impairment Tables and if Mr Morrow had a continuing inability to work.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mr Morrow had one or more physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairments, and if so, whether these impairments collectively scored at least 20 points under the Impairment Tables. Furthermore, the Tribunal had to determine if Mr Morrow had a continuing inability to work and, consequently, whether his DSP should be suspended or cancelled. A key consideration was whether each of Mr Morrow's impairments had been fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised, and were expected to continue for at least two years, as required by the Impairment Tables.

The Tribunal found that Mr Morrow did have impairments, satisfying paragraph 94(1)(a) of the Act. However, when assessing the severity of his chronic low back pain under Table 4 of the Impairment Tables, the Tribunal gave less weight to a late, cursory report from his general practitioner, Dr Gibson, which was at odds with other evidence. Instead, the Tribunal relied on a job capacity assessment conducted by an occupational therapist and a psychologist, which Mr Morrow largely confirmed in oral evidence. This assessment indicated a 5-point rating for his spinal condition, rather than the 10 points he sought. After assigning zero points for other conditions, the Tribunal concluded that Mr Morrow had a total of 5 points under the Impairment Tables, falling short of the 20-point threshold.

Consequently, Mr Morrow did not meet the criteria under paragraph 94(1)(b) of the Act and was therefore not qualified for DSP. In accordance with section 80 of the Administration Act, the Tribunal ordered the cancellation of Mr Morrow's DSP, deeming it the appropriate course given the likely protracted or indefinite nature of his lack of qualification. The Tribunal noted that the medical evidence had been inconsistent and suggested Mr Morrow might benefit from assembling more complete and consistent medical evidence should he reapply for DSP in the future.