Jones v Administrative Appeals Tribunal [2010] FCA 363

Jones v Administrative Appeals Tribunal [2010] FCA 363

The proposed appeal could not succeed because, from 24 October 2008, the applicant had reached the pension age applicable to her under s 23(5C) and therefore was no longer qualified for newstart allowance under s 593(1)(g)(i). Section 23(5C) defines pension age by reference to age and does not create retirement options. Special benefit could not be granted because an age pension was payable to the applicant, so the condition for exercising the discretion in s 729 was not met. The Social Security Act did not confer the elections or options asserted by the applicant. Since none of the proposed grounds disclosed error by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, an extension of time was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Institute an Appeal From a Decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal / Federal Court Determination of Extension of Time Application and Third Respondent's Notice of Motion for Summary Dismissal or Permanent Stay
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; third respondent's notice of motion dismissed; costs ordered against the applicant.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal' 'newstart Allowance Qualification' 'pension Age' 'special Benefit Eligibility' 'question of Law Appeal']
['administrative Law' 'social Security Law'] ['extension of Time to Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal' 'newstart Allowance Qualification' 'pension Age' 'special Benefit Eligibility' 'question of Law Appeal']

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

Application for Extension of Time to Institute an Appeal From a Decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal / Federal Court Determination of Extension of Time Application and Third Respondent's Notice of Motion for Summary Dismissal or Permanent Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time within which to institute an appeal from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision given on 21 August 2009.' "Whether the proposed appeal raised arguable questions of law concerning cancellation of the applicant's newstart allowance after she reached pension age." 'Whether the applicant had an election or option to remain on newstart allowance, receive special benefit, or avoid transfer to age pension.' 'Whether the Secretary could grant special benefit where an age pension was payable to the applicant.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed appeal could not succeed because, from 24 October 2008, the applicant had reached the pension age applicable to her under s 23(5C) and therefore was no longer qualified for newstart allowance under s 593(1)(g)(i). Section 23(5C) defines pension age by reference to age and does not create retirement options. Special benefit could not be granted because an age pension was payable to the applicant, so the condition for exercising the discretion in s 729 was not met. The Social Security Act did not confer the elections or options asserted by the applicant. Since none of the proposed grounds disclosed error by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, an extension of time was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; third respondent's notice of motion dismissed; costs ordered against the applicant.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time within which to institute an appeal from the decision of the first respondent given on 21 August 2009 be refused.' "The third respondent's notice of motion be dismissed." "The costs of the third respondent's notice of motion be costs in this application." "The applicant pay...