Tamas Vass and Secretary, Department of Social Services

Case [2014] AATA 621


[2014] AATA 621  

Division GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION

File Number

2014/1472

Re

Tamas Vass

APPLICANT

And

Secretary, Department of Social Services

RESPONDENT

DECISION

Tribunal

Dr P McDermott RFD, Senior Member

Date 2 September 2014
Place Brisbane

The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

..............................[Sgd]..........................................

Dr P McDermott RFD, Senior Member

CATCHWORDS

SOCIAL SECURITY – Pensions, benefits and allowances – Disability support pension – Whether 20 impairment points – Whether continuing inability to work – Applicant did not complete the Program of Support – Decision affirmed

LEGISLATION

Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) ss 26, 94

Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) ss 13, 14, 42, Sch 2 cls 3, 4

CASES

Tey and Secretary, Department of Social Services [2013] AATA 753

SECONDARY MATERIALS

Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011

Social Security (Requirements and Guidelines – Active Participation for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011

REASONS FOR DECISION

Dr P McDermott RFD, Senior Member

2 September 2014

INTRODUCTION

  1. I have to determine whether Mr Tamas Vass (“the applicant”) is entitled to disability support pension (“DSP”). The applicant elected not to give evidence but made submissions in support of his application.

    PRIOR DECISIONS

  2. On 14 January 2013 the applicant lodged a claim for DSP. On 1 February 2013 this claim was rejected. On 13 March 2013 an authorised review officer affirmed that decision. On 7 May 2013 the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (“SSAT”) affirmed the decision to reject the claim. On 18 March 2014 the applicant made an application to this Tribunal for review of the decision to reject the claim for DSP.

    RELEVANT LEGISLATION

  3. The legislation that I have to administer is the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) (“the Act”) and the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) (“the Administration Act”).

  4. Section 94 of the Act provides that in order to be qualified to receive DSP the applicant must have:

    ·a physical, intellectual or psychiatric impairment (s 94(1)(a) of the Act);

    ·an impairment rating of at least 20 points (s 94(1)(b) of the Act); and

    ·a continuing inability to work (s 94(1)(c) of the Act).

  5. The Administration Act provides that the start day for a claimant who qualifies to receive DSP is the date on which they contact the Department regarding the payment, the deemed date of claim (ss 13, 41, 42, Sch 2 cl 3 of the Administration Act). The applicant will be entitled to receive DSP if he was qualified to receive that benefit as at the deemed date of the claim. If he was not qualified to receive DSP on that date he will nevertheless be entitled to receive DSP if he becomes qualified within thirteen weeks of lodging a claim. In that event, the start-day is the day that he becomes qualified to receive the social security benefit (Sch 2 cl 4(1) of the Administration Act).

  6. There are a number of Ministerial Determinations which have to be considered.[1] The Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support…

Details
AGLC
Tamas Vass and Secretary, Department of Social Services [2014] AATA 621
Case
[2014] AATA 621
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Tamas Vass versus the Secretary, Department of Social Services, revolves around the eligibility of Mr. Tamas Vass for the disability support pension (DSP). Mr. Vass initially applied for DSP on 14 January 2013, but his claim was rejected by the Department of Social Services on 1 February 2013. Subsequent reviews by an authorised review officer and the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) also affirmed the rejection. Mr. Vass then sought further review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The central legal issues to be decided by the AAT pertained to whether Mr. Vass qualified for DSP under the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) and the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth), specifically if he met the criteria for a physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairment, an impairment rating of at least 20 points, and a continuing inability to work. Additionally, the Tribunal had to determine if Mr. Vass became qualified for DSP within the thirteen-week period following the lodging of his initial claim.

The AAT carefully examined the relevant legislation and Ministerial Determinations, including the Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011 and the Social Security (Requirements and Guidelines – Active Participation for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011. These Determinations provide the Impairment Tables and guidelines necessary for assessing the level of functional impact of impairments and the active participation requirements for DSP eligibility. The Tribunal focused on the assessment of Mr. Vass's functional capacity and whether his impairments met the statutory criteria for DSP. The AAT concluded that while Mr. Vass had impairments, they did not meet the necessary threshold to qualify for DSP. Consequently, the AAT affirmed the earlier decisions to reject Mr. Vass's claim for DSP.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

I have to determine whether Mr Tamas Vass (“the applicant”) is entitled to disability support pension (“DSP”). The applicant elected not to give evidence but made submissions in support of his application. PRIOR DECISIONS On 14 January 2013 the applicant lodged a claim for DSP. On 1 February 2013 this claim was rejected. On 13 March 2013 an authorised review officer affirmed that decision. On 7 May 2013 the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (“SSAT”) affirmed the decision to reject the claim. On 18 March 2014 the applicant made an application to this Tribunal for review of the decision to reject the claim for DSP. RELEVANT LEGISLATION The legislation that I have to administer is the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) (“the Act”) and the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) (“the Administration Act”). Section 94 of the Act provides that in order to be qualified to receive DSP the applicant must have:·a physical, intellectual or psychiatric impairment (s 94(1)(a) of the Act);·an impairment rating of at least 20 points (s 94(1)(b) of the Act); and·a continuing inability to work (s 94(1)(c) of the Act). The Administration Act provides that the start day for a claimant who qualifies to receive DSP is the date on which they contact the Department regarding the payment, the deemed date of claim (ss 13, 41, 42, Sch 2 cl 3 of the Administration Act). The applicant will be entitled to receive DSP if he was qualified to receive that benefit as at the deemed date of the claim. If he was not qualified to receive DSP on that date he will nevertheless be entitled to receive DSP if he becomes qualified within thirteen weeks of lodging a claim. In that event, the start-day is the day that he becomes qualified to receive the social security benefit (Sch 2 cl 4(1) of the Administration Act). There are a number of Ministerial Determinations which have to be considered.[1] The Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011 (“the Disability Support Pension Determination”) came into force on 1 January 2012. The Disability Support Pension Determination contains the Impairment Tables which are function based and are intended to determine the level of functional impact of impairments (s 5 of the Disability Support Pension Determination). The Social Security (Requirements and Guidelines – Active Participation for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011 (“the Active Participation Determination”) came into force on 3 September 2011. Section 5 of the Active Participation Determination sets out the requirements for active participation. Both of these Determinations are in evidence.[1] See s 26 of the Act.ASSESSMENT PERIOD I am required to determine whether the applicant became qualified at any time within the thirteen week period (“the relevant period”) from when the applicant lodged the claim for DSP. There is no issue that this period commenced on 14 January 2013 and concluded on 15 April 2013.ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.