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

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr. Stephens against the rejection of his claim for a disability support pension. The Secretary of the Department of Social Services was the respondent. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether Mr. Stephens' physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairments met the criteria for the pension, specifically whether his medical conditions were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised during the assessment period, and whether he had an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the relevant Impairment Tables.

The Tribunal considered the evidence presented by Mr. Stephens regarding his various health conditions, including chronic back pain stemming from a workplace accident, a frozen left wrist, sleep apnoea, and diabetes. Mr. Stephens testified about the significant impact these conditions had on his daily activities, including self-care, household tasks, and mobility. The Tribunal noted that while Mr. Stephens was an honest witness who clearly suffered from multiple health issues impacting his daily life, the assessment of his eligibility for the disability support pension was governed by specific legal principles concerning the timing of diagnosis, treatment, and stabilisation of his conditions.

The Tribunal applied the principles established in cases such as *Re Bobera* and *Re Fanning*, which clarify that the assessment must be based on the circumstances and evidence available at the time of the original claim and the subsequent 13-week period. Any progression of a medical condition or improvement in treatment efficacy occurring after this assessment period is not to be used to directly award the pension, but may be relevant to the weight given to evidence. The Tribunal found that while Mr. Stephens' case was well-prepared and his difficulties were acknowledged, the evidence did not establish that his conditions met the required criteria within the relevant assessment period.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning Mr. Stephens' claim for a disability support pension was not granted on the basis of the assessment period considered.