McKechnie and Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Mr. McKechnie (the Applicant) against the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission (the Commission) regarding a claim for compensation for malignant melanoma. The Applicant contended that his service in the Australian Defence Force (ADF) materially contributed to his condition. The Commission had made a reviewable decision that was being challenged. The case was heard by N. Isenberg SM.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Applicant's service in the ADF materially contributed to the onset of his malignant melanoma, a condition specified by the Minister as an occupational disease. This involved considering the effect of statutory presumptions and the nature of the evidence required to establish a material contribution, particularly in relation to sun exposure during service.

The court considered expert medical evidence, including that of Professor Scott Menzies, who opined that the Applicant's ADF service, characterised by intermittent, severe sunburns over approximately 12 months of his 8-year service, materially contributed to his melanoma. Professor Menzies distinguished between ongoing occupational sun exposure and intermittent, severe sunburns, suggesting the latter posed a greater risk for melanoma development. The court also noted other factors such as the Applicant's childhood sun exposure, family history, and personal characteristics, as considered by Dr. Lobel. Ultimately, the court was satisfied that the Applicant's melanoma was materially contributed to by his ADF service.

Consequently, the court set aside the reviewable decision and substituted a decision that the respondent is liable under section 14 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988 (Cth).