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

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Thea Thomas against a decision by the Department of Social Services regarding an overpayment of Parenting Payment. The dispute centred on whether Ms Thomas had exceeded the maximum portability period for receiving this payment while she was overseas. The case was heard by J Sosso SM in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Ms Thomas had complied with the portability requirements of the relevant social security legislation, and if not, whether the six-week maximum portability period had been exceeded. A further issue was whether "special circumstances" existed that would warrant the exercise of discretion in her favour, and how the six-week period should be calculated, specifically concerning fractions of a day.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's submissions regarding her mother's serious illness in Bali, which she contended prevented her permanent return to Australia. However, the Tribunal found that the central question was the calculation of the portability period. Relying on the High Court decision in *Prowse v McIntyre*, the Tribunal affirmed the legal principle that the law takes no account of fractions of a day when calculating time periods. Applying this principle to the applicant's travel dates, the Tribunal determined that the period she was absent from Australia exceeded the six-week maximum.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that Ms Thomas was subject to a Parenting Payment debt of $19,287.61 for the period from 1 November 2013 to 23 November 2014.