Bunnett and Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Bunnett against the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission. Mr Bunnett sought payment for hearing aids, having previously received similar aids for a compensable injury. The dispute arose because legislative amendments had altered the basis of his entitlement to compensation, and the Commission refused to fund the same type of hearing aids as previously provided. The case was heard by Deputy S A Forgie P.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether a reviewable decision had been made by the Commission, which would grant the Tribunal jurisdiction to hear the matter. This involved determining the applicability of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (SRC Act), the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988* (DRC Act), and the *Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004* (MRC Act) to Mr Bunnett's claim, particularly in light of legislative changes that occurred after his initial injury.

The court reasoned that Mr Bunnett's entitlement to treatment was governed by section 280A of the MRC Act, not section 16 of the DRC Act. Determinations made under section 280A are not reviewable by the Tribunal. The court noted that Mr Bunnett had accepted an earlier determination made under the SRC Act and had not sought its reconsideration, meaning it was not a "reviewable decision" under section 60(1) of the SRC Act. Consequently, the court found that no reviewable decision had been made in relation to the current request for hearing aids, and therefore, the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to proceed.