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

This matter concerned an appeal by the Applicant, Pedel, against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) regarding eligibility for paid parental leave. The dispute centred on whether the Applicant, a member of the Australian Defence Force deployed overseas, met the Australian residency requirements for the Commonwealth Parental Leave Pay (CPPL) Scheme. The appeal was heard by Emeritus Professor P A Fairall, Senior Member.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was the interpretation of the Australian residency test under the *Paid Parental Leave Act 2010* (Cth), specifically concerning the effect of an absence from Australia on that test. The Tribunal was required to determine whether a discretionary extension to the residency requirement could be exercised for a defence force member who was overseas for a period exceeding 56 weeks but not more than three years. A further issue involved the meaning of the term 'deployment' in the context of the legislation, and whether to adopt a textual or purposive approach to its interpretation, particularly where the primary statute did not provide a definition and subordinate legislation might conflict with the statute's purpose.

The Senior Member adopted a purposive approach to statutory interpretation, concluding that the ordinary meaning of 'deployment' was appropriate in this context. The Tribunal found that an incorrect decision on this important matter, arising from a lack of precision in the statutory provision, should be corrected. Consequently, the AAT's decision of 28 June 2023 was set aside.

The matter was remitted to the Respondent for further processing with a finding that the Applicant satisfies paragraph 46(4)(a) of the *Paid Parental Leave Act 2010* (Cth).