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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mrs Russell against the cancellation of her Disability Support Pension (DSP) by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services. The dispute centred on whether Mrs Russell met the eligibility criteria for DSP under section 94 of the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) as at 2 July 2018, specifically whether her impairments attracted a rating of 20 or more points under the *Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011* (Impairment Tables). The decision was made by Senior Member Mrs J C Kelly of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether a notice dated 7 July 2017 requiring Mrs Russell to provide current medical evidence was valid, and more critically, whether Mrs Russell satisfied the criteria under section 94 of the Act on 2 July 2018. This required determining if she had a physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairment, and if that impairment was of 20 or more points under the Impairment Tables, considering the definitions of "impairment" and the conditions for assigning an impairment rating, namely that the condition must be fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, and likely to persist for more than two years.

The Tribunal affirmed the validity of the notice issued by the Secretary. In assessing Mrs Russell's eligibility for DSP, the Tribunal considered various medical conditions mentioned in the evidence, including epilepsy, aneurysms, vision impairment, emphysema, COPD, liver function issues, hypertension, back pain, hypercholesterolaemia, and a fractured ankle. The Tribunal applied the Impairment Tables, which are function-based and assess the level of functional impact of an impairment on a person's ability to work. An impairment rating could only be assigned if the condition causing the impairment was fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, and was more likely than not to persist for more than two years.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Social Services & Child Support Division of the Tribunal, which had previously affirmed the Authorised Review Officer’s decision to cancel Mrs Russell’s DSP. The Tribunal noted that this decision did not preclude Mrs Russell from reapplying for DSP in the future and providing up-to-date evidence of her current conditions and their functional impact.