ALFRED CHARLES ROSE (DECEASED) and COMCARE

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2009] AATA 550

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No S 200700041

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION		)
Re		ALFRED CHARLES ROSE (DECEASED)

Applicant

And COMCARE

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Senior Member L Hastwell
Dr E T Eriksen (Member)

Date21 July 2009

PlaceAdelaide

Decision The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and determines that, pursuant to the 1971 Act, Mr Rose’s employment by the Commonwealth was a contributing factor to the aggravation and recurrence of his disease of alcoholism.

..............................................

L HASTWELL
  (Senior Member)

Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 s 124(1)

Re Rose and Comcare [2003] AATA 1286
Re The Company and Commissioner of Taxation (AAT 12865, 7 May1998)
Commonwealth v Bourne (1960) 104 CLR 32
Connair Pty Ltd v Frederiksen (1979) 25 ALR 155
Treloar v Australian Telecommunications Commission (1990) 26 FCR 316
Federal Broom Company Pty Ltd v Semlitch (1964) 110 CLR 626
Johnston v Commonwealth (1982) 150 CLR 331

REASONS FOR DECISION

21 July 2009   Senior Member L Hastwell
  Dr E T Eriksen (Member)           

the history of the claim

1.      Alfred Charles Rose was employed by the Australian National Railways (ANR) (then The Commonwealth Railways) from 1953 until 1986.  He commenced work as a silver boy/youth conductor in the passenger trains when he was 15 years of age.  At the age of 21, he graduated to the role of food waiter and by approximately 1965 he became a drinks steward.  He became a senior waiter in charge of the dining car in 1970.  He was based in Port Pirie throughout his period of employment.

2.      His entire working life with ANR was spent on the passenger trains that travelled between Port Pirie and Kalgoorlie (the Trans Australian) and Port Pirie and Alice Springs (the Ghan).

3.      It is common ground that Mr Rose developed the disease of alcoholism.  In 1971 he was admitted to the Royal Adelaide Hospital for several days for treatment of the condition of alcoholic liver disease (T7/271).  This was the first diagnosis of this condition.

4.      Mr Rose left ANR in 1986.  He was retired on the basis of invalidity due to his alcoholism.  He did not return to any employment after that date.

5.      On 14 November 2000, Mr Rose lodged a claim for compensation for “Alcoholism compounded by my work as a drink waiter.  Redeployment refused even when recommended by Commonwealth doc” (T35/402-413).

6.      In that application, 1979 was given as the date when Mr Rose first sought medical treatment for the injury or noticed the injury.

7.      Mr Rose’s claim was made under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (the 1988 Act).

8. Section 124(1) of the 1988 Act provides that compensation is payable to a person for an injury that predated the commencement of that Act (1 December 1988), if compensation would have been payable to that person under the provisions of the Act in force at the date of injury.

9.      It has been accepted throughout the lengthy course…