Section 104 — Social Security Act 1991: Seasonal workers—preclusion period
Text of the provision Official document
(1) This section applies if: (a) a person has lodged a claim for disability support pension; and (b) the person qualifies, under section 94, for disability support pension; and (c) at any time during the 6 months immediately before the day on which the person lodged the claim, the person, or the person’s partner, has been engaged in seasonal work. Note: For seasonal work see subsection 16A(1). (2) Disability support pension is not payable to the person: (a) if the person is subject to a seasonal work preclusion period (whether in relation to the claim referred to in subsection (1) or any other claim under this Act) and the Secretary has not made a determination under subsection (3) in relation to the person—for the person’s seasonal work preclusion period; or (b) if the Secretary has made a determination under subsection (3) in relation to the person—for that part (if any) of the person’s seasonal work preclusion period to which the person is subject as a result of the determination. Note: For seasonal work preclusion period see subsection 16A(1). (3) If the Secretary is satisfied that a person is in severe financial hardship because the person has incurred unavoidable or reasonable expenditure while the person is subject to a seasonal work preclusion period (whether in relation to the claim referred to in subsection (1) or any other claim under this Act): (a) the Secretary may determine that the person is not subject to the whole, or any part, of the preclusion period; and (b) the determination has effect accordingly. Note 1: For in severe financial hardship see subsection 19C(2) (person who is not a member of a couple) or subsection 19C(3) (person who is a member of a couple). Note 2: For unavoidable or reasonable expenditure see subsection 19C(4).
Official source: Federal Register of Legislation
Search case law on this topic
See judgments from Australian courts and tribunals with a plain-English summary and legal holding.
Explore case law →