Administrative
Appeals
Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2003] AATA 1319
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No Q2001/801
VETERANS' APPEALS DIVISION )
Re FLORENCE BENNETT Applicant
And
REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal Dr EK Christie, Member Date22 December 2003
PlaceBrisbane
Decision The decision under review is set aside and in substitution therefor the Tribunal decides that the death of the late veteran, Herbert Bennett, was war-caused and that the applicant, Ms Florence Bennett, is entitled to receive a war widow's pension. ...................(Sgd)......................
EK Christie
Member
CATCHWORDS
VETERANS' AFFAIRS – benefits and entitlements – war widows’ pension - whether war-caused death - malignant neoplasm of the stomach - Helicobacter pylori infection - hypothesis - reasonable hypothesis - facts associated with hypothesis necessary to support the hypothesis or which are inconsistent with the hypothesis have not been disproved beyond reasonable doubt – decision set aside
Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, ss 120, 120A, 196B
Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 49 ALD 193
Repatriation commission v Law (1980) 31 ALR 140
Doolette v Repatriation Commission (1990) 21 ALD 489
Repatriation Commission v Hancock [2003] FCA 711
Re Starcevich and Repatriation Commission (1986) 10 ALN 202
Re Doyle and Repatriation Commission (1986) 47 ALD 187
Jackman v Repatriation Commission [1997] FCA 564
Bushell v Repatriation Commission (1992) 175 CLR 408
Connors v Repatriation Commission [2000] FCA 783
Byrnes v Repatriation Commission (1993) 177 CLR 564
Re Thomas and Repatriation Commission [2003] AATA 65REASONS FOR DECISION
22 December 2003 Dr EK Christie, Member 1. Herbert Bennett, the late veteran, passed away on 17 February 2000. He was 79 years of age. The applicant, his widow, claimed an entitlement to a pension under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (“the Act”). The Veterans’ Review Board, on 10 July 2001, determined the death of the veteran was not caused by his war service.
2. The late Mr Bennett had no accepted or rejected service-related disabilities.
3. Because of her hospitalisation, Florence Bennett could not attend the hearing. At the hearing she was represented by her daughter, Ms Jacqueline Ferguson. The respondent was represented by Mr M Smith, a Departmental Advocate.
4. At the hearing the Tribunal had in evidence before it documents lodged pursuant to section 37 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Exhibit R1) and the various documents tendered by the parties.
Facts
5. The general facts were not in dispute and may be stated briefly. Florence Bennett is the legal widow of the late veteran. The late Mr Bennett had operational service in World War II in New Guinea from 8 April 1942 to 25 September 1944.
6. The late veteran suffered for many years from hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, cardiac arrhythmia and syncopal attacks (that is, blackouts). He had a pacemaker inserted on 11 November 1999. It was at this time that it was first discovered that he was suffering from stomach cancer.
7. The cause of the late veteran’s death was certified as:
“1. Disseminated gastric carcinoma
2. Hypertension, pacemaker” (Exhibit…
Continue reading Bennett and Repatriation Commission
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Bennett and Repatriation Commission [2003] AATA 1319
- Case
- [2003] AATA 1319
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court held that the Commission had erred in its assessment by not considering all relevant facts and by not applying the correct legal principles. The Commission had dismissed a reasonable hypothesis that the veteran's death was caused by his exposure to Helicobacter pylori infection during his war service. The court found that the Commission had failed to consider the medical evidence that linked the infection to the veteran's military service, and that the hypothesis was supported by the available evidence. The court also noted that the Commission did not adequately address the requirement that facts inconsistent with the hypothesis must be disproved beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the court set aside the Commission's decision and substituted its own, finding that the veteran's death was indeed war-caused.
The Federal Court's decision established that the Commission must thoroughly consider all reasonable hypotheses and relevant evidence when determining the cause of a veteran's death for pension entitlement purposes. The court's ruling underscored the importance of a balanced approach in assessing whether a death is war-caused, ensuring that all pertinent facts are considered and evaluated correctly. The final order was that the decision under review was set aside, and in its place, the court determined that the veteran's death was war-caused, entitling the applicant to a war widow's pension.
Orders
Orders of the court
The decision under review is set aside and in substitution therefor the Tribunal decides that the death of the late veteran, Herbert Bennett, was war-caused and that the applicant, Ms Florence Bennett, is entitled to receive a war widow's pension.
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.