Glozier v Secretary, Department of Family & Community Services [2000] FCA 376

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Glozier v Secretary, Department of Family & Community Services [2000] FCA 376 SOCIAL SECURITY – rental assistance – right or interest in principal home – purported sale of half interest by joint proprietor to wife – whether reasonable security of tenure – whether finding on material question of fact WORDS AND PHRASES – "reasonable security of tenure" Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) ss 11(4)(e), 1068-F1 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 43(2B) Collector of Customs v Pozzolanic (1993) 43 FCR 280 at 286-7 applied Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang (1996)185 CLR 259 at 291 applied A v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1999) 53 ALD 545 at par 54 applied

JOHN TREVOR GLOZIER v SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES NO. T 20 OF 1999 HEEREY J 30 MARCH 2000 MELBOURNE (HEARD IN HOBART)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TASMANIA DISTRICT REGISTRY T20 OF 1999

BETWEEN: JOHN TREVOR GLOZIER

Applicant

AND: SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

Respondent

JUDGE: HEEREY J

DATE OF ORDER: 30 MARCH 2000

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE (HEARD IN HOBART)

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application is dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs including reserved costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TASMANIA DISTRICT REGISTRY T20 OF 1999

BETWEEN: JOHN TREVOR GLOZIER

Applicant

AND: SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

Respondent

JUDGE: HEEREY J

DATE: 30 MARCH 2000

PLACE: MELBOURNE (HEARD IN HOBART)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicant appeals from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal ("AAT") given on 20 August 1999. The AAT affirmed a decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal ("SSAT") affirming Departmental decisions that the applicant was not eligible for rent assistance under the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) ("the Act") because he had a right or interest in his principal home which gave him reasonable security of tenure in the home. The applicant lived in a unit on a property of which he and his estranged wife were the registered joint proprietors. He claimed that his wife had paid him $28,000 for his half interest in the property.