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

This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant against the rejection of their claim for a Disability Support Pension (DSP). The applicant had lodged multiple prior claims for DSP, all of which were rejected, with previous reviews by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) and the Department's Authorised Review Officer (ARO) affirming those rejections. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant's various medical conditions were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised (FDTS) and whether these conditions resulted in impairments that attracted the requisite points under the Impairment Tables to qualify for a DSP.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's conditions, including a sleep disorder, shoulder condition, chronic low back pain, and psychological condition, were FDTS during the relevant qualification period. The Tribunal was required to determine if these conditions, individually or in combination, resulted in impairments that attracted at least 20 points under the Impairment Tables, thereby establishing a severe impairment and a continuing inability to work. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant had actively participated in a program of support, although this aspect was not central to the final determination.

The Tribunal reasoned that for a condition to qualify for an impairment rating, it must first be FDTS. The applicant's psychological condition was found not to be FDTS as she had not undertaken reasonable trials of antidepressant or anti-anxiety medication. Similarly, her shoulder conditions were not considered FDTS. While her lower back condition was found to be FDTS and resulted in a mild impairment attracting 5 points under Table 4, her sleep apnoea was deemed to have insufficient evidence to be considered FDTS. Consequently, the applicant did not meet the criteria for a severe impairment, and the Tribunal affirmed the decision to reject the DSP claim.