Administrative
Appeals
Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2005] AATA 203
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No Q2003/1022
VETERANS’ APPEALS DIVISION )
Re GLYNN JONES Applicant
And
REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal Dr K S Levy, Member Date11 March 2005
PlaceBrisbane
Decision The Tribunal determines that –
1. the diagnoses of chronic Generalised Anxiety Disorder with Tremor, chronic Depressive Disorder and Alcohol Abuse are accepted by the Tribunal.
2. these diagnoses are not war-caused pursuant to section 9 of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act.
3. the Tribunal affirms the decision of the Veterans Review Board dated 21 October 2003 in all other respects i.e. the claims made are not war-caused.
..................[Sgd]............................
K S Levy
Member
Administrative
Appeals
Tribunal
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
)No Q2003/1022
VETERANS’ APPEALS DIVISION )
Re GLYNN JONES Applicant
And
REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Respondent
CORRIGENDUM [2005] AATA 203
Tribunal Dr KS Levy, Member Date24 August 2005
PlaceBrisbane
The Reasons for Decision handed down by the Tribunal on 11 March 2005 are amended by deleting the last sentence of paragraph 93 which reads: “These factors and definitions relevantly provide:”.
[Sgd]
KS Levy
Member
CATCHWORDS
VETERANS’ AFFAIRS – Veterans’ entitlements – disability pensions – war-caused diseases during operational service – whether applicant’s claimed conditions of depressive disorder, post traumatic stress disorder, generalised anxiety disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse are war-caused – whether applicant experienced a severe stressor and or a severe psychosocial stressor – diagnoses of generalised anxiety disorder with tremor, depressive disorder and alcohol abuse accepted – none of the applicant’s conditions are war-caused – Decision under review affirmed.
Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 ss 5D, 6C, 9, 13, 70, 119, 120, 120A, 196B, Schedule 2
Byrnes v Repatriation Commission (1993) 177 CLR 565
Jackman v Repatriation Commission [1997] FCA 564
Repatriation Commission v Gosewinckel (1999) 59 ALD 690
Repatriation Commission v Smith (1987) 15 FCR 327
Benjamin v Repatriation Commission (2003) 70 ALD 622
Fogarty v Repatriation Commission (2003) FCAFC 136
Repatriation Commission v Hancock [2003] FCA 711
Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82
East v Repatriation Commission (1987) 74 ALD 518
Repatriation Commission v Stares (1996) 41 ALD 212
Repatriation Commission v Bey (1997) 47 ALD 481
Lees v Repatriation Commission (2002) 125 FCR 331
White v Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA 663
Hillier v Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA 897
Stonehouse v Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA 707
Repatriation Commission v Law (1980) 31 ALR 140
Repatriation Commission v Stoddart [2004] FCA 633
Stoddart v Repatriation Commission [2003] FCA 334McKenna v Repatriation Commission [1999] FCA 323
REASONS FOR DECISION
11 March 2005 Dr K S Levy, Member Introduction
1. The applicant, Glynn Keith Jones, has applied under section 29(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 for review of a decision of the Veterans’ Review Board dated 21 October 2003. That decision rejected a claim that the veteran’s conditions of Ischaemic Heart Disease, Depressive Disorder and Alcohol Dependence or Alcohol Abuse were war-caused, under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (the Act). The…
Continue reading Jones and Repatriation Commission
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Jones and Repatriation Commission [2005] AATA 203
- Case
- [2005] AATA 203
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Tribunal was tasked with deciding whether the applicant's conditions were war-caused, specifically if he had experienced a severe stressor or a severe psychosocial stressor as defined by the Act. The medical evidence presented indicated that the applicant suffered from chronic generalised anxiety disorder with tremor, depressive disorder, and alcohol abuse. The Tribunal had to assess whether these conditions met the statutory criteria for being considered war-caused.
Upon review, the Tribunal found that while the diagnoses of the applicant's conditions were accepted, none of these conditions were attributable to his war service. The Tribunal held that the applicant did not experience a severe stressor or a severe psychosocial stressor as required by the legislation. Therefore, the Tribunal affirmed the earlier decision of the Veterans Review Board, which had also concluded that the applicant's claims were not war-caused.
The Tribunal's final orders recognised the accepted diagnoses but maintained that they were not war-caused. The decision affirmed the Veterans Review Board's ruling in all other respects, effectively denying the applicant's claim for war-caused disability pensions.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Tribunal determines that –
1. the diagnoses of chronic Generalised Anxiety Disorder with Tremor, chronic Depressive Disorder and Alcohol Abuse are accepted by the Tribunal.
2. these diagnoses are not war-caused pursuant to section 9 of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act.
3. the Tribunal affirms the decision of the Veterans Review Board dated 21 October 2003 in all other respects i.e. the claims made are not war-caused.
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.