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

This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant against a decision to cancel his Disability Support Pension (DSP). The applicant contended that his DSP was cancelled due to his repeated requests for portability, rather than a genuine change in his eligibility. The core dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the criteria for DSP at the date of cancellation, specifically concerning the severity of his medical conditions and their impact on his work capacity. The case was heard by D Mitchell M.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant’s impairments attracted 20 points or more under the relevant Impairment Tables, whether he had a continuing inability to work, and if so, whether he met the requirements for unlimited portability of the DSP. Central to these issues was the determination of whether the applicant's various medical conditions were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised at the date of cancellation, a prerequisite for them to be considered permanent and thus eligible for impairment point allocation.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant's spine conditions were fully diagnosed, they were not fully treated and stabilised, meaning they could not be considered permanent for the purpose of the Impairment Tables. Similarly, his emphysema and osteoarthrosis were not considered permanent as they were not fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised. His other conditions, including diabetes, cerebrovascular accident, and gout, were found to be fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, but were assigned zero points under the Impairment Tables. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant's impairments did not attract 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables.

As the applicant did not meet the threshold of 20 impairment points, the Tribunal found no need to consider the further issues of continuing inability to work or portability requirements. Accordingly, the decision under review, which affirmed the cancellation of the applicant's DSP, was affirmed.