Administrative
Appeals
Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2004] AATA 820
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No Q2002/1148
VETERANS' APPEALS DIVISION )
Re RAYMOND DAVID HUNTLEY Applicant
And
REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal Mr RG Kenny, Member Date6 August 2004
PlaceBrisbane
Decision The Tribunal:
(a) affirms the decision under review insofar as it relates to post traumatic stress disorder and depressive disorder; and
(b) sets aside the decision under review insofar as it relates to anxiety disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse and substitutes the decision that anxiety disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse are war-caused diseases, that pension for any incapacity associated with those diseases is payable to the applicant from and including 1 December 2000 and that the matter of assessment of that incapacity is remitted to the Repatriation Commission.
[Sgd]
……..RG Kenny…….
Member
CATCHWORDS
VETERANS’ AFFAIRS – disability pension – operational service in Malaya – operational service continuing during period of leave - appropriate diagnosis of psychiatric conditions – application of Statements of Principles – diagnostic criteria for post traumatic stress disorder not met - reasonable hypothesis of relevant relationship to service raised for anxiety disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse – assessment remitted to Repatriation Commission
Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 ss 5D, 6D, 7, 13, 14, 120, 120A
Fogarty v Repatriation Commission [2003] FCAFC 136
Benjamin v Repatriation Commission (2001) 70 ALD 622
Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82
White v Repatriation Commission [2004] FCA 633
Re Robertson and Repatriation Commission (1998) 50 ALD 668
Re Sandiford and Repatriation Commission (1998) 27 AAR 210
Repatriation Commission v Cornelius [2002] FCA 750REASONS FOR DECISION
2 August 2004 Mr RG Kenny, Member Background
1. Raymond Huntley (the applicant) served in the Australian Army from 23 January 1961 until 22 January 1964 and that period of overall service included service in the then Federation of Malaya from 12 October 1961 until 27 May 1963. On 1 March 2001, he lodged a claim for the acceptance of post traumatic stress disorder as being related to his Malayan service. That claim, made in accordance with section 14 of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (the Act), was rejected by a delegate of the Repatriation Commission (the respondent) on 13 June 2001.
2. On 26 August 2002, the matter was heard by the Veterans’ Review Board (VRB) which varied the decision by adding the diagnoses of generalised anxiety disorder, depressive disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse. The VRB affirmed the decision, rejecting the claim for post traumatic stress disorder and also for generalised anxiety disorder, depressive disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse. In relation to depressive disorder, the VRB determined that there was no such incapacity present in the applicant. On 13 December 2002, the applicant sought review of the VRB decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal).
Hearing
3. At the hearing, the applicant was represented by Ms B Carter-Nicoll of counsel and the respondent was represented by Mr B Williams. The following material was…
Continue reading Huntley and Repatriation Commission
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Huntley and Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA 820
- Case
- [2004] AATA 820
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court found that the diagnostic criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder were not met, aligning with the Repatriation Commission's decision. However, the court held that a reasonable hypothesis could be raised regarding a relevant relationship between Mr. Huntley's anxiety disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse and his operational service. The court relied on previous cases such as Fogarty v Repatriation Commission and Repatriation Commission v Deledio, which established that a reasonable hypothesis could be sufficient to warrant a pension if direct evidence was lacking. Consequently, the court set aside the Commission's decision regarding these conditions and remitted the matter for reassessment by the Repatriation Commission to determine the extent of Mr. Huntley's incapacity due to these conditions.
The Federal Court of Australia affirmed the decision concerning post-traumatic stress disorder and depressive disorder but annulled the decision regarding anxiety disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse. It ordered that these conditions be considered war-caused diseases and that pension payments for any incapacity associated with these diseases would commence from 1 December 2000. The court further directed that the Repatriation Commission reassess Mr. Huntley's incapacity related to these conditions. This decision ensures that Mr. Huntley's claims for these specific psychiatric conditions are reconsidered in light of the court's findings.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Tribunal:
(a) affirms the decision under review insofar as it relates to post traumatic stress disorder and depressive disorder; and
(b) sets aside the decision under review insofar as it relates to anxiety disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse and substitutes the decision that anxiety disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse are war-caused diseases, that pension for any incapacity associated with those diseases is payable to the applicant from and including 1 December 2000 and that the matter of assessment of that incapacity is remitted to the Repatriation Commission.
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.