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

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of Nikoloski and the Secretary, Department of Social Services, concerning the cancellation of the applicant's Disability Support Pension (DSP). The applicant sought a second review of the decision to cancel his DSP, which had been effected on 17 July 2017 under section 80 of the *Social Security (Administration) Act 1999* (Cth). The AAT had jurisdiction to hear the matter under section 179 of the same Act.

The central legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's medical conditions were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised, and whether, as a consequence, he had an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the relevant Impairment Tables at the date his DSP was cancelled. Eligibility for a DSP requires, among other things, a physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairment of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables, and a continuing inability to work. The Impairment Tables are function-based, assessing functional capacity and limitations resulting from a person's condition, and can only be applied if a condition is permanent and likely to persist for more than two years.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on assessing the applicant's functional capacity against the Impairment Tables as they stood on 17 July 2017. Despite the applicant's assertions of significant limitations, including spinal pain, finger problems, and left leg issues, the Tribunal found that his conditions, when assessed according to the criteria for permanency and functional impairment, did not meet the threshold for a 20-point impairment rating. The applicant's ability to perform various activities, such as driving, performing some household chores, and participating in community events, was taken into account. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant's conditions could only be assigned 10 impairment points as at the date of cancellation.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the previous decision to cancel the applicant's DSP, finding that he did not qualify for the pension as his impairment rating did not meet the required 20 points.