Scott v Secretary, Department of Social Security [1999] FCA 1774

Scott v Secretary, Department of Social Security [1999] FCA 1774

The Special Benefit review form lodged by Mr Scott on 19 June 1995 was capable of being characterised as a claim for Special Benefit and therefore as an initial claim within s 100(2) of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth). Section 100(2)(a)(i) covered Special Benefit as a social security benefit and did not require it to be similar in character to Disability Support Pension; that similarity requirement applied only to sub-paragraph (ii). Mr Scott was therefore entitled to Disability Support Pension from 19 June 1995 to 5 October 1995. However, neither the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), the Guide, nor the common law imposed on the Department a duty sounding in damages to inform the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision and Application Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal in VG 666 of 1996 allowed; application in VG 69 of 1997 dismissed.
Legal Topics
['disability Support Pension' 'special Benefit' 'initial Claim' 'backdating of Social Security Payments' 'breach of Statutory Duty' 'common Law Duty of Care' 'misfeasance in Public Office' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Immunity']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision and Application Under S 39 B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (cth) / Final Judgment

  1. 1 ['Whether a Special Benefit review form lodged by Mr Scott on 19 June 1995 was an initial claim for the purposes of s 100(2) of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth).' 'Whether Special Benefit had to be similar in character to Disability Support Pension for s 100(2)(a) to apply.' 'Whether Mr Scott was entitled to Disability Support Pension from 19 June 1995 to 5 October 1995.' 'Whether the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), the Guide, or the common law imposed a duty of care or statutory duty sounding in damages on the Department to inform Mr and Mrs Scott of possible entitlements.' "Whether the Department or its officers acted maliciously, in bad faith, or committed misfeasance in public office in relation to Mr or Mrs Scott's claims." 'Whether the AAT member was liable in respect of the decision made on 15 October 1996.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Special Benefit review form lodged by Mr Scott on 19 June 1995 was capable of being characterised as a claim for Special Benefit and therefore as an initial claim within s 100(2) of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth). Section 100(2)(a)(i) covered Special Benefit as a social security benefit and did not require it to be similar in character to Disability Support Pension; that similarity requirement applied only to sub-paragraph (ii). Mr Scott was therefore entitled to Disability Support Pension from 19 June 1995 to 5 October 1995. However, neither the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), the Guide, nor the common law imposed on the Department a duty sounding in damages to inform the...

Court Disposition

Appeal in VG 666 of 1996 allowed; application in VG 69 of 1997 dismissed.

Orders

  • ['VG 666 of 1996: Appeal is allowed.' 'VG 666 of 1996: Decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal made on 15 October 1996 is set aside.' 'VG 666 of 1996: Declare the applicant was entitled to payment of disability support pension from 19 June 1995 to 5 October 1995.' 'VG 666 of 1996: Order that the respondent pay...