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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr. Smith against the cancellation of his disability support pension by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services. The central dispute revolved around whether Mr. Smith's impairments attracted an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the relevant Impairment Tables during the qualification period, as required by section 94(1)(b) of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth). The decision was made by Member D K Grigg.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were to determine the level of functional impact of Mr. Smith's impairments, specifically his spinal and shoulder impairments, and to assess whether these impairments, when rated according to the Impairment Tables, reached the threshold of 20 points. This required considering whether Mr. Smith's conditions were permanent, meaning they were fully diagnosed, treated, stabilised, and likely to persist for more than two years. The Tribunal also had to consider whether other conditions, such as diabetes and obesity, could be taken into account, based on the available medical evidence and Mr. Smith's acceptance of limitations in this regard.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on applying the Impairment Tables to the medical evidence. While Mr. Smith presented evidence of pain and limitations in activities such as overhead work, bending, and prolonged sitting, the corroborating evidence, including reports from a Joint Case Assessor and medical practitioners, did not consistently meet the criteria for a 20-point rating. For instance, observations indicated Mr. Smith could walk at a moderate pace and perform daily living activities, and he reported being able to use a chainsaw and ride-on mower for extended periods. Although Dr. Gamaralalage's later report indicated significant pain and stiffness, the Tribunal found that the overall evidence, particularly concerning the permanence and functional impact of his spinal and shoulder impairments, did not reach the required 20-point threshold. The Tribunal also noted insufficient evidence regarding the permanence and functional impact of his diabetes and obesity.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel Mr. Smith's disability support pension, finding that his impairments did not attract an impairment rating of 20 or more points as required by the legislation.