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

This matter concerned an application for a disability support pension (DSP) by the Applicant, XVYL, against a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services. The core dispute revolved around whether the Applicant met the legislative criteria for a DSP, specifically concerning the qualification period, the severity of her impairments, and her continuing inability to work. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was tasked with reviewing the decision.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the Applicant’s impairments were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised at the qualification period, and whether these impairments attracted a rating of 20 points or more under the relevant Impairment Tables. Additionally, the Tribunal had to determine if the Applicant had a continuing inability to work, as required by section 94(1) of the Social Security Act 1991. The Tribunal noted that the qualification criteria under section 94(1) are conjunctive, meaning all elements must be satisfied for an applicant to qualify for the DSP.

The Tribunal considered various medical reports and evidence, including those from a psychiatrist, haematologist, endocrinologist, and mental health professionals, as well as the Applicant's own evidence and that of her mother, whom the Tribunal found to be credible witnesses. In the absence of independent expert medical evidence, the Tribunal informed itself about the Applicant's anorexia nervosa by referencing peer-reviewed medical journal articles. The Tribunal applied the principles outlined in the Social Security Act 1991, the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999, the Impairment Tables Determination, and the Social Security Guide, emphasising the need to follow relevant policy for consistency unless there were cogent reasons to depart.

Ultimately, the Tribunal found that the Applicant satisfied the requirements for a DSP as at 20 August 2019. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted it with a decision that the Applicant qualified for the DSP on that date.