Lindsay Tiplady and Repatriation Commission
[2015] AATA 81
•11 February 2015
[2015] AATA 81
Division VETERANS' APPEALS DIVISION File Number(s)
2015/0014
Re
Lindsay Tiplady
APPLICANT
And
Repatriation Commission
RESPONDENT
DECISION
Tribunal Senior Member Bernard J McCabe Date 11 February 2015 Date of written reasons 17 February 2015 Place Sydney The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the application.
.......................[sgd].............................................
Senior Member Bernard J McCabe
CATCHWORDS
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – jurisdiction – whether there is a reviewable decision – date of effect of pension – earlier decision of the Tribunal – no jurisdiction
LEGISLATION
Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986
REASONS FOR DECISION
Senior Member Bernard J McCabe
17 February 2015
A decision in these proceedings was delivered orally together with reasons at the conclusion of the hearing. Written reasons have been prepared for the benefit of the applicant. These written reasons were distilled from the transcript of the hearing.
Mr Tiplady has asked the Tribunal to review a decision as to date of effect – the date from which his pension should have been paid under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986.
The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to entertain this application. The only decision before me is an earlier decision of the Tribunal which deals with the issue. I doubt it is a reviewable decision. The Tribunal, in the person of Senior Member Allen, appears to have dealt with everything in front of it. There is no reason to suppose – particularly given the time that has elapsed – that the Tribunal did not complete its task on that occasion. It reached a view and provided a decision, and that decision has been implemented by the respondent. The respondent has not made a fresh decision and there has been no further review by the Veterans’ Review Board.
If Mr Tiplady was unhappy with the earlier Tribunal decision, the correct course was to appeal it to the Federal Court at that time. He did not do so.
The Tribunal, generally speaking, does not review its own decisions. It sometimes returns to a matter to fill in gaps if issues were not dealt with. That is what happened here: an earlier Tribunal decision concluded Mr Tiplady was entitled to the pension, but left the question of date of effect unresolved. Senior Member Allen in the subsequent proceedings filled in that gap. I cannot now say whether I would have reached the same view, but it would not be appropriate for me to revisit the earlier proceedings and substitute my own view.
I would add that if the Tribunal did have jurisdiction, I would not be inclined to grant an extension of time so the matter could proceed. There is a public interest in dealing with these matters to finality as quickly as possible, and this matter was thought to be finalised years ago – although Mr Tiplady says he has been protesting the outcome the entire time. He should have appealed but did not exercise his right to do so. He did not offer any reason for his delay in exercising his appeal rights. It should all have been dealt with.
Secondly, it is just too difficult at this point to revisit the issues given that files have been destroyed and memories compromised. It is too difficult reconstructing what happened after so long. The respondent would have difficulty preparing its case and the Tribunal would have real problems establishing what occurred. At this distance, it is hard to work out whether the case has any merit: at least part of the dispute appears to turn on what constitutes an “application in writing” and the effect of the applicant’s correspondence before a decision as to eligibility was made.
CONCLUSION
I am not satisfied there is a reviewable decision before me. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to deal with its earlier decision. For the sake of completeness, if I am wrong as to jurisdiction, I would not extend time for making an application to review that decision.
I certify that the preceding 8 (eight) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of Senior Member Bernard J McCabe ......................[sgd].............................................
Dated 17 February 2015
Date of hearing 11 February 2015 Applicant In person Advocate for the Respondent Mr T O’Reilly, Department of Veterans’ Affairs
0
0
0