Webster and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)
Case
•
[2022] AATA 479
•18 March 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Webster and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2022] AATA 479
[2022] AATA 479
18 March 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application by the Applicant for an extension of time to seek a review of a decision made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The Applicant had been receiving parenting payments as a person not a member of a couple. In September 2016, the Department determined she was a member of a couple, and this decision was affirmed on internal review and subsequently by the AAT in March 2017. The statutory time limit for lodging an application for review of the AAT's decision expired in May 2017, but the Applicant did not lodge her application for an extension of time until December 2021.
The legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant the Applicant's application for an extension of time to apply for a review of the AAT's decision. Section 29(7) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) permits the Tribunal to extend the time for making an application for review if satisfied it is reasonable to do so. This provision is typically interpreted by reference to principles established in cases such as *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Minister for Home Affairs and Environment*, which consider factors including the length of the delay, the explanation for the delay, prejudice to the respondent, the merits of the substantive application, and the availability of alternative avenues of relief.
The Tribunal considered the significant length of the delay, which was over four years, and found that the Applicant had not provided a satisfactory explanation for this delay. While acknowledging that refusing the extension might deny the Applicant relief in this specific matter, the Tribunal noted that future avenues of relief from the Department might remain available depending on her circumstances. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that it was not satisfied that it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant the application for an extension of time.
The legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant the Applicant's application for an extension of time to apply for a review of the AAT's decision. Section 29(7) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) permits the Tribunal to extend the time for making an application for review if satisfied it is reasonable to do so. This provision is typically interpreted by reference to principles established in cases such as *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Minister for Home Affairs and Environment*, which consider factors including the length of the delay, the explanation for the delay, prejudice to the respondent, the merits of the substantive application, and the availability of alternative avenues of relief.
The Tribunal considered the significant length of the delay, which was over four years, and found that the Applicant had not provided a satisfactory explanation for this delay. While acknowledging that refusing the extension might deny the Applicant relief in this specific matter, the Tribunal noted that future avenues of relief from the Department might remain available depending on her circumstances. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that it was not satisfied that it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant the application for an extension of time.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Webster and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review) [2022] AATA 479
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
0
Parker v The Queen
[2002] FCAFC 133
Parker v The Queen
[2002] FCAFC 133