Skip to content

Tribunal: Senior Member L Kirk

The applicant claimed and received youth allowance whilst studying at university. He was also granted a student start up scholarship as an ancillary benefit of his allowance. In order to qualify for youth allowance and the student start up scholarship, a person must prove they are ‘undertaking full-time study’ or carrying an equivalent full time study load (EFTSL) load of at least 0.375.[1] 

The issues for determination were whether:

the applicant qualified for youth allowance between 26 August 2015 and 13 May 2016 on the basis he was enrolled in full-time study

the applicant qualified for the scholarship during the period 1 July 2015 to 31 December 2015.

The Department of Social Services (the Department) claimed the applicant was not enrolled in full-time study and was therefore required to repay Centrelink for overpayments.

The issue in dispute was whether the applicant met full time study requirements during the period in question.[2] Data matching provided by the university to Centrelink indicated that, between 26 August 2015 and 13 April 2016, the applicant’s EFTSL was only 0.3, less than the required study load for full time study.

The applicant was able to demonstrate in his oral evidence and through supporting documents that he maintained a full time study load of 0.5 EFTSL throughout his period of study. The applicant wished to transfer to a law degree from an arts degree, and he was at the relevant time enrolled in subjects from both degrees. The applicant was able to show that records provided to Centrelink by the university were incorrect. He provided documentation that demonstrated that he had withdrawn from subjects that he would otherwise not have been able to withdraw from if he had not been undertaking full time study.

The AAT accepted the applicant’s evidence over the data match information provided to Centrelink by the university. It found the university’s records may have been incorrect due to the applicant not being billed for certain subjects that he was enrolled in, while awaiting the outcome of a number of appeals.

The AAT was satisfied that the applicant qualified for youth allowance and the scholarship during the relevant periods and found that the applicant owed no debts.[3]

Read the full decision on AustLII.

 

[1] Section 540(a)(i) of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth)

[2] Section 541B(1)(b)(iii) of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth)

[3] Section 1223(1) of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth)