Mouhamad Masri and Secretary, Department of Social Services

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Mouhamad Masri against a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services to affirm a decision that he did not qualify for a disability support pension. The dispute centred on whether Mr Masri's medical conditions met the criteria for a disability support pension, specifically concerning the requirement for conditions to be fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, and to result in a specified level of functional impairment. The case was heard by Dr I Alexander, Member.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mr Masri's various medical conditions, including diabetes mellitus, diabetic nephropathy, diabetic retinopathy, hypertension, and depression/anxiety, were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised during the relevant claim period. Crucially, the Tribunal had to determine if these conditions resulted in an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables, as required by section 94(1)(b) of the relevant Act, and whether there was sufficient evidence to corroborate the functional impairment caused by these conditions.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the evidence presented for each of Mr Masri's claimed conditions. While diabetes mellitus was diagnosed, the Tribunal found it was not fully treated or stabilised due to Mr Masri's poor compliance with monitoring and medication. Similarly, although diabetic nephropathy and hypertension were considered permanent, there was insufficient evidence of functional impairment. Diabetic retinopathy, though diagnosed and treated, was not found to be fully stabilised. The claimed depression and anxiety lacked a diagnosis by a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist, precluding an impairment rating. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Mr Masri's impairment did not reach the required 20 points.

The decision under review was affirmed, meaning Mr Masri did not qualify for the disability support pension.