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

This matter concerned an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) regarding a decision to refuse a disability support pension (DSP). The applicant, Woolterton, sought to challenge the Secretary of the Department of Social Services' decision. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the criteria for DSP, specifically concerning the severity and stability of his medical conditions during a defined qualification period.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairment, and if so, whether these impairments attracted ratings of at least 20 points under the Impairment Tables. Crucially, the Tribunal also had to determine if the applicant had a "continuing inability to work" as defined by the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth). This required assessing whether the applicant's various medical conditions, including widespread osteoarthritis, groin pain, shoulder pain, elbow pain, and back and neck pain, were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised during the relevant qualification period.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the requirement that an impairment can only be rated under the Impairment Tables if the condition is permanent, meaning it is fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, and likely to persist for more than two years. The Secretary contended that none of the applicant's conditions met this threshold during the qualification period. For instance, the applicant's hip and knee conditions, while diagnosed, had not been fully treated and stabilised as indicated by the pending specialist review for potential joint replacement surgery. Similarly, the groin pain was linked to arthritis and not considered fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised, with planned pain management treatment incomplete. The shoulder and elbow pain also lacked sufficient evidence of being fully diagnosed or stabilised, and the back and neck pain had no specialist review and an outstanding pain management referral.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the AAT, finding that the applicant did not qualify for DSP. This conclusion was based on the assessment that none of the applicant's medical conditions were fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised during the qualification period, meaning no impairment points could be assigned under the Impairment Tables. The Tribunal also noted that even if 20 impairment points had been assigned, it was unlikely the application would have succeeded due to other factors.