Administrative Appeals Tribunal
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No 2009/3864
VETERANS’ ENTITLEMENTS DIVISION ) Re RODNEY BAWDEN Applicant
And
REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal G. D. Friedman, Senior Member Date3 May 2011
PlaceMelbourne
CORRIGENDUM TO DECISION
Pursuant to s 43AA of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 the Tribunal directs the Registrar to amend the decision dated 2 May 2011 as follows:
(a) paragraph forty-two, first line, delete the comma after the word ‘finding’;
(b) delete paragraph forty-three and replace with:
‘In respect of factor 6(a) of SoP Nº 1 of 2009 and factor 5(a) of SoP Nº 76 of 1998, in view of the Tribunal’s conclusion about the date of clinical onset of alcohol dependence, in 1965 Mr Bawden did not suffer from a clinically significant psychiatric condition, so the material does not point to a reasonable hypothesis linking Mr Bawden’s alcohol dependence to his operational service with respect to these factors.’; and
(c) paragraph forty-six, second line, delete ‘his’ and insert ‘the’.
................[signed]..............................
Senior Member
Administrative Appeals Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2011] AATA 283
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No 2009/3864
VETERANS' ENTITLEMENTS DIVISION ) Re RODNEY CHARLES BAWDEN Applicant
And
REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal G. D. Friedman, Senior Member Date2 May 2011
PlaceMelbourne
Decision The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.
................[signed]..............................
Senior Member
VETERANS' AFFAIRS – veterans’ entitlements - naval service in Vietnam – post-traumatic stress disorder - traumatic event - whether condition diagnosed and war-caused - alcohol dependence - depressive disorder - whether war-caused
Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 ss 9, 120(1)
Benjamin v Repatriation Commission (2001) 70 ALD 622
Delahunty v Repatriation Commission [2004] FCA 309
Lees v Repatriation Commission [2002] FCAFC 398
McKerlie v Repatriation Commission [2010] FCA 1127
Mines v Repatriation Commission (2004) 86 ALD 62
Repatriation Commission v Bey (1997) 79 FCR 364
Repatriation Commission v Cornelius [2002] FCA 750
Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82
Repatriation Commission v Gorton (2001) 110 FCR 321
Repatriation Commission v Hill [2002] FCAFC 192
Repatriation Commission v Hill [2008] FCA 50
Stoddart v Repatriation Commission (2003) 197 ALR 283
Woodward v Repatriation Commission (2003) 131 FCR 473
REASONS FOR DECISION
2 May 2011 G. D. Friedman, Senior Member 1.
Rodney Bawden served in the Royal Australian Navy (the navy) from
8 January 1964 to 7 January 1976. His service included nine voyages to Vietnam on HMAS Sydney between 1967 and 1969, and this constitutes operational service under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (the Act).
2. The respondent has accepted that Mr Bawden’s medical conditions of bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus are war-caused, and he receives a disability pension at 40 per cent of the general rate. The respondent rejected his claim that post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), alcohol dependence or abuse and depressive disorder are war-caused conditions. His claim was refused by the Veterans’ Review Board, and he is seeking review of the decision.
ISSUES
3. The issues…
Continue reading Bawden and Repatriation Commission
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Bawden and Repatriation Commission [2011] AATA 283
- Case
- [2011] AATA 283
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal questions before the Tribunal were the nature and causation of Bawden's diagnosed conditions and their relationship to his military service in Vietnam. Specifically, the Tribunal had to ascertain whether the conditions were indeed diagnosed, whether they arose out of or were aggravated by his service in the war, and if they met the criteria for war-related entitlements under the relevant legislation. The Tribunal also considered the impact of Bawden's alcohol dependence on the causation and severity of his other conditions.
In its decision, the Tribunal reviewed the medical evidence and expert opinions presented by both parties. It found that while Bawden had been diagnosed with PTSD, alcohol dependence, and depressive disorder, it was not satisfied that these conditions were war-caused. The Tribunal highlighted that the evidence did not conclusively establish a direct causal link between Bawden's military service and his mental health conditions, particularly in the context of his alcohol dependence. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the Repatriation Commission's decision, affirming that Bawden was not entitled to the claimed veterans' entitlements.
The Tribunal's decision affirmed the earlier determination by the Repatriation Commission, denying Bawden's claim for veterans' entitlements related to his diagnosed conditions. The Tribunal's ruling stands on the basis that the evidence did not sufficiently establish a war-caused origin for Bawden's PTSD, alcohol dependence, and depressive disorder.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.