Hill v Repatriation Commission

[2001] FCA 1775

Kenneth Norman Hill v Repatriation Commission [2001] FCA 1775
Veterans' Affairs

Kenneth Norman Hill v Repatriation Commission [2001] FCA 1775

Veteran's Affairs - Whether post traumatic stress disorder a war-caused disease - whether reasonable hypothesis raised connecting the disease with eligible war service - whether hypothesis fits the template in the relevant Statement of Principles - whether established beyond reasonable doubt that disease was not war-caused - whether Administrative Appeals Tribunal failed to consider alternative claim based on psychoactive substance abuse or dependence.

Matter No D 18 of 2000

KENNETH NORMAN HILL v REPATRIATION COMMISSION

von DOUSSA J

ADELAIDE (HEARD IN DARWIN)

17 DECEMBER 2001

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NORTHERN TERRITORYDISTRICT REGISTRY	D 18 OF 2000

BETWEEN:	KENNETH NORMAN HILL APPLICANT
AND:	REPATRIATION COMMISSION RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	von DOUSSA J
DATE OF ORDER:	17 DECEMBER 2001
WHERE MADE:	ADELAIDE (HEARD IN DARWIN)

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.       The application be allowed.

2.       The decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal made on 20 November 2000 be set aside.

3.       The matter be remitted to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to be determined according to law.

4.       The respondent pay the applicant's costs of this application.

Note:       Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NORTHERN TERRITORYDISTRICT REGISTRY	D 18 OF 2000

BETWEEN:	KENNETH NORMAN HILL APPLICANT
AND:	REPATRIATION COMMISSION RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	von DOUSSA J
DATE:	17 DECEMBER 2001
PLACE:	ADELAIDE (HEARD IN DARWIN)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1 This is an appeal on questions of law brought under s 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) which affirmed the decision of a delegate of the respondent, which in turn had been affirmed by the Veterans Review Board. These decisions had rejected the applicant's claim for a pension by way of compensation for three conditions, psycho-active substance abuse or dependence, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and electrocution.

2       When the applicant was seventeen years of age he joined the Royal Australian Navy on 23 October 1965. He served until 19 March 1978. He had two short periods of operational service aboard the HMAS Melbourne from 25 April 1966 to 6 May 1966 and from 30 May 1966 to 9 June 1966. These periods of operational service constitute eligible war service within the meaning of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (the Act). He also had service from 7 December 1972 until 19 March 1978 which constituted defence service within the meaning of the Act.

3       On joining the Navy the applicant underwent a three month training course before joining the HMAS Melbourne on 5 February 1966. His training was as an electrical mechanic, and his position on the ship was as an ordinary seaman, electrical mechanic.

4       Before the applicant left the Navy he married in December 1975. After leaving the Navy he obtained a position as a technician installing telephone cabling in commercial buildings and repairing electronic equipment…