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

This matter concerned an application for a disability support pension by the Applicant, who was 51 years of age at the time of the hearing. The Applicant contended that he suffered from major depression and the side-effects of polysubstance abuse, which he argued were a consequence of his depression. He further asserted that both conditions were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, attracting 20 points or more under the relevant impairment tables, rendering him unfit for work. The case was heard by J Sosso SM.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Applicant's conditions, namely depression and polysubstance abuse, met the criteria for a disability support pension, specifically whether they attracted 20 points or more under the impairment tables. This required the Tribunal to determine the nature of the Applicant's conditions, their relationship to each other, and whether they were sufficiently treated and stabilised to warrant the pension.

The Tribunal found the medical evidence before it to be scant, flimsy, and contradictory. While the Applicant presented reports from his general practitioner and psychiatrist, these documents contained minimal information and lacked detail regarding other treatments he had undergone, such as counselling with a psychiatric nurse and a psychologist. The Tribunal noted inconsistencies in the medical opinions, particularly from Dr Hayes, whose reports in 2014 and 2016 offered differing perspectives on the cause and prognosis of the Applicant's depression and its relationship to his substance abuse. Consequently, the Tribunal was unable to reach a secure conclusion as to whether the depression was a by-product of substance abuse or vice versa, or whether the conditions were adequately treated and stabilised.

Given the inability to make a definitive finding on the nature and stability of the Applicant's conditions due to insufficient medical evidence, the Tribunal did not proceed to consider whether the Applicant had a continuing inability to work. The decision under review was affirmed.