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

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Thornton against a decision by the Department of Social Services to reject her claim for a Disability Support Pension (DSP). Ms Thornton had applied for DSP on 23 July 2015, citing Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Depression with psychosis, and Arthritis with osteopenia as her disabling conditions. The Department's initial decision, affirmed by an Authorised Review Officer and subsequently by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) at first instance, was that Ms Thornton's conditions were not permanent, meaning they were not fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised at the time of her claim, and therefore did not attract the necessary impairment points. This appeal was to the General Division of the Tribunal.

The central legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Ms Thornton was qualified for DSP on 23 July 2015, and if not, whether she became qualified within the 13-week claim period following her application, as provided by clause 4(1) of Schedule 2 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999. To qualify for DSP, a claimant must have a physical, psychiatric, or intellectual impairment attracting at least 20 impairment points under the relevant Impairment Tables, and a continuing inability to work at least 15 hours per week. The Tribunal was required to determine if Ms Thornton's impairments met these criteria during the relevant period, particularly considering the requirement for a corroborated diagnosis by a specialist.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the timing and nature of Ms Thornton's diagnoses. While a psychiatrist, Dr Roberts, provided diagnoses of severe PTSD and Major Depressive Disorder with psychotic features, the Tribunal found that these conditions, as required by the Impairment Tables, were not fully diagnosed until Dr Roberts' assessment. Although Ms Thornton's general practitioner had diagnosed Major Depressive Disorder three years prior, the Tribunal noted a significant delay and the lack of corroborating medical evidence for her cited arthritis and hand injury conditions. Crucially, Dr Roberts' reports indicated that treatment was ongoing and that Ms Thornton had not responded to it, suggesting her conditions were not yet stabilised. Furthermore, medical certificates from general practitioners dated after the claim period stated that her PTSD was "likely to show considerable improvement within 2 years," which the Tribunal did not consider in its assessment of the claim period.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review. It concluded that Ms Thornton did not meet the criteria for DSP during the claim period because her impairments were not considered fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised. The Tribunal noted that Ms Thornton was at liberty to make a fresh application for DSP, at which time subsequent medical evidence and any changes in the functional impact of her impairments could be considered.