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

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision made by the Social Services and Child Support Division (SSCSD) of the Tribunal. The applicant contended that the Department of Social Services had applied incorrect information when raising Centrelink debts and that the SSCSD had not applied the law correctly. However, both the Department and the SSCSD had made decisions in favour of the applicant.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's grounds for review could engage the Tribunal's jurisdiction under section 179(2)(a) of the *Administration Act*. The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant's contentions, such as a belief that a decision was wrong, documents were not considered, or the law was not applied correctly, were sufficient to warrant a review of the SSCSD's prior decision.

Senior Member Theodore Tavoularis reasoned that the applicant's grounds for review did not compel a review of the SSCSD's decision. The Tribunal's jurisdiction was limited to considering the reviewable decision before it, and the applicant's stated grievances did not, on reasonable analysis, engage the jurisdiction under section 179(2)(a) of the *Administration Act*. The Senior Member found these contentions to be frivolous, vexatious, misconceived, or lacking in substance.

Consequently, the Senior Member was satisfied that the application had no reasonable prospect of success and ordered that the application be dismissed pursuant to section 42B(1) of the *AAT Act*.