Nedorezov and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)
Case
•
[2024] AATA 154
•9 February 2024
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Nedorezov and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2024] AATA 154
[2024] AATA 154
9 February 2024
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application for an age pension by the applicant, Mr Nedorezov, against the Secretary of the Department of Social Services. The core dispute revolved around whether Mr Nedorezov had accumulated the required 10 years of qualifying Australian residence to be eligible for the age pension. The decision was made by Mrs J C Kelly, Senior Member, of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mr Nedorezov qualified for the age pension on 30 September 2022, the date he lodged his application, or within the subsequent 13 weeks. While the respondent accepted that Mr Nedorezov had been an Australian resident since 22 November 2016, the applicant had only accumulated six years and one month of qualifying residence by the end of the claim period. The period in dispute was from 15 August 2011, when Mr Nedorezov departed Australia, until his return on 22 November 2016.
The Tribunal considered the legislative framework, including s 7(2)(a) and s 7(3) of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth), which outline factors to be considered when determining residence, such as accommodation, family relationships, financial ties, assets, frequency and duration of travel, and the intention to remain permanently. The Tribunal also referred to s 7(5) of the Act, which defines 10 years of qualifying Australian residence. Drawing on principles from cases like *Hafza v Director-General of Social Security*, the Tribunal noted that residence involves both physical presence and the intention to treat a place as home, and that continuity of association is key, even during absences. The Tribunal found that Mr Nedorezov's prolonged absence in Russia, necessitated by family circumstances, did not constitute special circumstances that would allow him to retain his Australian residence during that period.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the reviewable decision made on 21 April 2023, finding that Mr Nedorezov had not established the required 10 years of qualifying Australian residence.
The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mr Nedorezov qualified for the age pension on 30 September 2022, the date he lodged his application, or within the subsequent 13 weeks. While the respondent accepted that Mr Nedorezov had been an Australian resident since 22 November 2016, the applicant had only accumulated six years and one month of qualifying residence by the end of the claim period. The period in dispute was from 15 August 2011, when Mr Nedorezov departed Australia, until his return on 22 November 2016.
The Tribunal considered the legislative framework, including s 7(2)(a) and s 7(3) of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth), which outline factors to be considered when determining residence, such as accommodation, family relationships, financial ties, assets, frequency and duration of travel, and the intention to remain permanently. The Tribunal also referred to s 7(5) of the Act, which defines 10 years of qualifying Australian residence. Drawing on principles from cases like *Hafza v Director-General of Social Security*, the Tribunal noted that residence involves both physical presence and the intention to treat a place as home, and that continuity of association is key, even during absences. The Tribunal found that Mr Nedorezov's prolonged absence in Russia, necessitated by family circumstances, did not constitute special circumstances that would allow him to retain his Australian residence during that period.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the reviewable decision made on 21 April 2023, finding that Mr Nedorezov had not established the required 10 years of qualifying Australian residence.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Jurisdiction
-
Statutory Construction
-
Natural Justice
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Appeal
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
0
Re Wybrow and Secretary, Department of Social Security
[1992] AATA 315
Hafza v Director-General of Social Security
[1985] FCA 201