Administrative
Appeals
Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2003] AATA 1027
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No Q2002/255
VETERANS' APPEALS DIVISION ) Re ANTHONY RICHARD LEES Applicant
And
REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal Deputy President Don Muller Date10 October 2003
PlaceBrisbane
Decision The Tribunal affirms the decision that the Post Traumatic Stress Disorder suffered by Anthony Richard Lees is not war-caused within the meaning of that term in the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986.
.................SIGNED..............................
D.W. MULLER
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
CATCHWORDS
Veteran’s Affairs – whether Post Traumatic Stress Disorder war-caused- whether severe stressor
Veteran’s Entitlements Act 1986 ss 9, 120(1), 120(3), 120A(3) and 196B(2)
Repatriation Commission v Deledio 83 FCR 82
REASONS FOR DECISION
Deputy President Don Muller 1. This is an application by Anthony Lees (“the Applicant”) to review a decision to refuse a claim for disability pension for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) on the grounds that it is not a war-caused disability within the meaning of that term in section 9 of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (“the Act”).
2. At the hearing, Mr. McGhee of Counsel represented the Applicant and Mr. Williams represented the Respondent.
3. The Applicant claims that he suffers from the psychiatric illness, PTSD, which was caused by a traumatic event whilst on board the HMAS Sydney in Vung Tau Harbour, Vietnam. The Applicant claims he was locked inside a freezer alone while scare charges were unexpectedly set off around the vessel.
4. The Tribunal heard oral evidence from the Applicant, Commodore Philip Mulcare and Commander Peter James Burn.
5. The following documents were before the Tribunal:
(a)The documents filed pursuant to section 37 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, exhibit 1;
(b)Statement of Richard Lee Burridge, dated 20 January 2003, exhibit 2;
(c)Statement of the Applicant, dated 28 March 2003, exhibit 3;
(d)Writeway report of Commodore Philip Mulcare, dated 14 January 2003, exhibit 4; and
(e)Statement of Commander Peter James Burn, received by the Tribunal on 11 March 2003, exhibit 5.
6. The following matters are not in dispute and the Tribunal finds:
(a)The Applicant was born on 11 January 1954.
(b)The Applicant joined the Royal Australian Navy at 15 years of age on 10 October 1969 and retired 20 years later on 20 November 1989.
(c)The Applicant completed an “initial cooks course” on 3 December 1971.
(d)The Applicant served as a cook on the HMAS Sydney from 13 September 1972 until 30 September 1973. Whilst serving on the Sydney, the aircraft carrier was used to carry cargo from Australia to Vietnam. The Sydney sailed from Garden Island on 1 November 1972 and arrived in Vung Tau on 23 November. The ship was unloaded between the hours of 0700 and 1830, after which time it proceeded to sea for “night steaming”.. The Sydney again anchored in Vung Tau on 24 November and discharge of cargo continued from 0700 to 1330, when all cargo had been off-loaded. The Sydney sailed at 1500 hours. It arrived in Hong Kong Harbour…
Continue reading Lees and Repatriation Commission
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Lees and Repatriation Commission [2003] AATA 1027
- Case
- [2003] AATA 1027
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether Lees' PTSD was caused by a severe stressor that arose out of his military service. The Court needed to examine whether the stressor that caused Lees' PTSD was related to his military service and whether it was of a severity that qualified as a war-caused condition under the Act. The Court also had to consider the definition of a "severe stressor" and the criteria for determining whether a stressor is war-caused. Furthermore, the Court was required to review the evidence presented and the reasoning of the Repatriation Commission in dismissing Lees' claim.
The Court found that the stressor that led to Lees' PTSD was not directly connected to his military service and did not meet the criteria of a severe stressor as defined by the Act. The Court held that the stressor was not of the kind that would be reasonably expected to happen as a result of service in the Australian Defence Force. The Court also noted that the Repatriation Commission had correctly applied the relevant statutory provisions and had made a decision that was supported by the evidence. The Court concluded that Lees' claim for war-caused PTSD was not valid under the Act.
The Court affirmed the decision of the Repatriation Commission that Lees' PTSD was not war-caused within the meaning of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986. The Tribunal's decision was upheld, and Lees' claim for war-caused PTSD was dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Tribunal affirms the decision that the Post Traumatic Stress Disorder suffered by Anthony Richard Lees is not war-caused within the meaning of that term in the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986.
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.