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

This matter concerned an appeal by the Secretary, Department of Social Services, against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The AAT had found that the Respondent was not a member of a couple for the purposes of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) from 26 June 2019, and therefore his Disability Support Pension (DSP) should be assessed at the single rate. The Respondent and his wife, Mrs Ross, were legally married and living under the same roof, but had completed forms indicating they had separated.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Respondent and Mrs Ross were a "couple" within the meaning of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth), despite living together. The Secretary contended that the nature of their commitment to each other, including their long-standing marriage, intention to live together for life, and provision of mutual support, indicated a couple-like commitment that was qualitatively different from relationships with other persons and demonstrated mutuality.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the documentary evidence might suggest a different conclusion, the personal evidence provided by the Respondent and Mrs Ross was crucial. The Tribunal found that their interactions demonstrated genuine respect and care, akin to friends or a carer arrangement, and that they "co-exist" rather than functioning as a couple. The Tribunal accepted that Mrs Ross provided a substantial carer role for the Respondent, which, if it ceased, would likely shift the burden to government-funded support. The Tribunal concluded, on balance, that the Respondent was not a member of a couple, viewing the situation objectively and accepting that their marriage had genuinely broken down.

The Tribunal affirmed the AAT's decision, finding that the Respondent was not a member of a couple from 26 June 2019 and that his DSP rate should be assessed at the single rate.