Firth and Repatriation Commission (Veterans' entitlements)

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant, Mr Firth, against a decision of the Veterans’ Review Board (VRB) which affirmed the Repatriation Commission's decision that his open-angle glaucoma was not war-caused. The applicant had served in the Australian Army and RAAF between 1984 and 1992, during which time he was repeatedly exposed to tear gas, including during training exercises in Australia and while deployed with the United Nations Transition Assistance Group in Namibia. The applicant provided lay witness statements detailing the frequency and effects of this exposure, including significant eye irritation and rubbing. Medical evidence confirmed the applicant suffers from bilateral open-angle glaucoma, which is not disputed as a condition he has.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant's open-angle glaucoma was war-caused, meaning it was attributable to his defence service. This required determining if the evidence established a reasonable hypothesis connecting his service, particularly his exposure to tear gas, with the development or aggravation of his condition, in accordance with the relevant Statement of Principles. The Tribunal also considered the medical evidence regarding the nature of pigment dispersion syndrome and its progression to open-angle glaucoma, and whether the applicant's service activities could have precipitated or aggravated this process.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant's extensive and repeated exposure to tear gas during his service, coupled with the evidence of significant eye irritation and vigorous rubbing, created a plausible link to his subsequent development of open-angle glaucoma. Medical evidence suggested that activities known to precipitate pigment release could cause a causal relationship with the aggravation of pigment dispersion syndrome, leading to increased intraocular pressure and glaucoma. The Tribunal found that the applicant's service, including the tear gas exposure and the subsequent rubbing of his eyes, was sufficient to raise a reasonable hypothesis that his condition was war-caused.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the previous decisions and substituted a new decision finding that the applicant's open-angle glaucoma was war-caused within the meaning of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986.