Vasiliou and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)
Case
•
[2020] AATA 962
•24 April 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Vasiliou and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2020] AATA 962
[2020] AATA 962
24 April 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application by Mr Vasiliou for a disability support pension, which was reviewed by the Tribunal. The dispute centred on whether Mr Vasiliou met the eligibility requirements for the pension, specifically concerning the permanence of his medical conditions and his participation in programs of support.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Vasiliou's physical and psychiatric conditions were permanent as at the qualification period, meaning they were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, and likely to persist for more than two years. It also needed to assess whether these impairments attracted a rating of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables, and crucially, whether he had a continuing inability to work, which included meeting program of support requirements.
The Tribunal applied the principles from *Harris v Secretary, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations* and *Shi v Migration Agents Registration Authority*, which dictate that eligibility must be assessed as at the date of the claim and a subsequent period thereafter, with later changes being irrelevant unless they shed light on the position at the relevant time. While the Tribunal was satisfied that Mr Vasiliou met the requirements under s 94(1)(a) and (b) of the Act, concerning the existence and permanence of his impairments, it found that he did not meet the mandatory requirement under s 94(1)(c) due to his failure to actively participate in a program of support prior to making his claim. The Tribunal noted that Mr Vasiliou had posted numerous videos on social media during the relevant period, which was inconsistent with a continuing inability to work.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that Mr Vasiliou did not qualify for the disability support pension as at the qualification period. The Tribunal encouraged Mr Vasiliou to consider reapplying if his circumstances changed and he could demonstrate that he met the program of support requirements in addition to the other eligibility criteria.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Vasiliou's physical and psychiatric conditions were permanent as at the qualification period, meaning they were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, and likely to persist for more than two years. It also needed to assess whether these impairments attracted a rating of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables, and crucially, whether he had a continuing inability to work, which included meeting program of support requirements.
The Tribunal applied the principles from *Harris v Secretary, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations* and *Shi v Migration Agents Registration Authority*, which dictate that eligibility must be assessed as at the date of the claim and a subsequent period thereafter, with later changes being irrelevant unless they shed light on the position at the relevant time. While the Tribunal was satisfied that Mr Vasiliou met the requirements under s 94(1)(a) and (b) of the Act, concerning the existence and permanence of his impairments, it found that he did not meet the mandatory requirement under s 94(1)(c) due to his failure to actively participate in a program of support prior to making his claim. The Tribunal noted that Mr Vasiliou had posted numerous videos on social media during the relevant period, which was inconsistent with a continuing inability to work.
Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that Mr Vasiliou did not qualify for the disability support pension as at the qualification period. The Tribunal encouraged Mr Vasiliou to consider reapplying if his circumstances changed and he could demonstrate that he met the program of support requirements in addition to the other eligibility criteria.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
-
Statutory Construction
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
KWQX and Child Support Registrar (Child support second review) [2023] AATA 2960
Cases Citing This Decision
1
KWQX and Child Support Registrar (Child support second review)
[2023] AATA 2960
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0
Gallacher v Secretary, Department of Social Services
[2015] FCA 1123
Secretary, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations v Harris
[2007] FCAFC 130