Johnson v Veterans' Review Board

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Johnson v Veterans’ Review Board [2005] FCA 1136

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for review of a decision of a Deputy President of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) dismissing an application for review of a decision of the Registrar of the AAT – where decision of the Registrar had previously been reviewed – AAT’s power to review a decision more than once.

Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth), ss 148(6A), 155AA, 155AB, 158(4), 166(1A)
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), ss 2A, 25, 26, 27, 29, 43, 43AA, 44

Re Johnson and Veterans’ Review Board & Anor (2000) 31 AAR 121 referred to
Johnson v Veterans’ Review Board [2002] FCA 1543 referred to
Johnson v Veterans’ Review Board [2003] FCAFC 89 referred to
Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Bhardwaj (2002) 209 CLR 597 cited
Chandler v Alberta Association of Architects [1989] 2 SCR 848 cited

KEITH DOUGLAS JOHNSON v VETERANS’ REVIEW BOARD

SAD 64 of 2004

LANDER J
19 AUGUST 2005
ADELAIDE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	SAD 64 OF 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

BETWEEN:	KEITH DOUGLAS JOHNSON APPLICANT
AND:	VETERANS' REVIEW BOARD RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	LANDER J
DATE OF ORDER:	19 AUGUST 2005
WHERE MADE:	ADELAIDE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        The appeal is dismissed.

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

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	SAD 64 OF 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

BETWEEN:	KEITH DOUGLAS JOHNSON APPLICANT
AND:	VETERANS' REVIEW BOARD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	LANDER J
DATE:	19 AUGUST 2005
PLACE:	ADELAIDE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) constituted by Deputy President Jarvis given on 10 March 2004.

2. The applicant has had a long history of litigation with the respondent in respect of his claim for a pension because of an incapacity caused by vertigo and epilepsy.

3. The applicant served in the Australian Army between 1962 and 1986.  He served in Borneo, Malaya and Vietnam.  He was awarded a Military Medal and two Distinguished Conduct Medals.  He said in his submissions to me that he had been ‘stabbed in the back’ by the Registrar of the Veterans’ Review Board by his act in dismissing the applicant’s application for review on 11 March 1999.

4. On 20 March 1996 the applicant made a claim under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) (the Act) to the Repatriation Commissioner for a pension in respect of incapacity caused by vertigo and epilepsy. The condition was subsequently rediagnosed as neuro-behavioural disorder. That claim was rejected on 28 March 1996.

5. On 28 April 1996 the applicant applied for a review by the Veterans’ Review Board (VRB) of that decision.

6. The VRB is a Board established by s 107VB of the Repatriation Act 1920 (Cth) which has been continued in existence by s 134 of the Act.

7. Appointment to the Board is provided for…