Administrative
Appeals
Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2005] AATA 2
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No Q2002/282
VETERANS' APPEALS DIVISION )
Re RICHARD JAMES PALMER Applicant
And
REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal Mr S C Fisher, Member Date4 January 2005
PlaceBrisbane
Decision The Tribunal decides:
(a) to vary the decision of the VRB where it amended the diagnosis concerning lumbar spondylosis by including a diagnosis of spondylolisthesis and spondylolysis by amending that diagnosis to one of spondylolisthesis; and
(b) to vary the diagnosis of the VRB of adjustment disorder to anxiety disorder; and
(c) to affirm the decision of the VRB in relation to denying liability for the conditions of adjustment disorder and alcohol dependence or alcohol abuse; and(d) to set aside the decision under review concerning spondylolisthesis and spondylosis and substitutes its decision that the condition of spondylolisthesis is war-caused; and
(e) the date of effect is 17 April 2000.
...................[Sgd].......................
S C Fisher
Member
CATCHWORDS
VETERANS’ AFFAIRS – Pensions, benefits and entitlements – Whether applicant’s conditions of spondylolisthesis and spondylolysis, adjustment disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse are war-caused – Diagnosis of spondylolisthesis and spondylolysis varied to spondylolysis – Diagnosis of adjustment disorder varied to anxiety disorder – Alcohol dependence or abuse is not war-caused - Spondylolisthesis is war-caused
Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 ss 6, 6F, 7, 9, 17, 119, 120, 120A, 174-176, 196
Secretary, Department of Social Security v Murphy, Federal Court, 29 June 1998, 809/98
Ajka Pty Ltd v Australian Fisheries Management Authority [2003] FCA 248; (2003) 74 ALD 21
Bantick and Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services [2003] AATA 472
Bramwell v Repatriation Commission (1998) 51 ALD 56
Collins v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1981) 36 ALR 598; (1981) 4 ALD 198Hillier v Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA 897
Schmidt v Repatriation Commission [2004] FCA 1158
Repatriation Commission v Stoddart [2003] FCAFC 300; (2003) 77 ALD 67
Repatriation Commission v Gorton (2001) 110 FCR 321; (2001) 65 ALD 609
Kattenberg vRepatriation Commission (2002) 73 ALD 365
Ahrens and Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA 943
Williamson and Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA 1185
Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82; (1998) 49 ALD 193
Mines v Repatriation Commission [2004] FCA 1331
Repatriation Commission v Bey (1997) 79 FCR 364; (1997) 47 ALD 481
ReAhrenfeld and Repatriation Commission (1992) 28 ALD 921
Woodward vRepatriation Commission [2003] FCAFC 160; (2003) 75 ALD 420
O’Grady v Northern Queensland Co Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 356; (1990) 19 ALD 743
White v Repatriation Commission [2004] FCA 633
Re Stonehouse and Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA 707REASONS FOR DECISION
4 January 2005 Mr S C Fisher, Member Introduction and background
1. Mr Richard James Palmer (applicant) served with the Royal Australian Navy from 31 January 1958 to 25 April 1978. The applicant rendered operational service on various dates from 26 March 1959 to 11 August 1966 and defence service from 7 December 1972 to 25…
Continue reading Palmer and Repatriation Commission
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Palmer and Repatriation Commission [2005] AATA 2
- Case
- [2005] AATA 2
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant’s conditions of spondylolisthesis and spondylolysis, adjustment disorder, and alcohol dependence or abuse were caused by his war service. The court had to determine the correct diagnosis of the applicant's medical conditions and whether they were connected to his service. Additionally, the court had to consider the statutory provisions under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 that pertain to the eligibility criteria for war-related medical conditions.
The court reviewed the evidence presented and the VRB's decision, ultimately deciding to vary the VRB's diagnosis of lumbar spondylosis by excluding spondylolisthesis and spondylolysis, affirming the diagnosis of anxiety disorder instead of adjustment disorder, and maintaining the denial of liability for alcohol dependence or abuse. The court found that spondylolisthesis was indeed caused by war service and set the date of effect for this condition as 17 April 2000. The decision to affirm the VRB’s denial of liability for adjustment disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse remained unchanged.
The court's orders were to vary the VRB's decision on the diagnosis of lumbar spondylosis by amending it to spondylolisthesis, vary the diagnosis from adjustment disorder to anxiety disorder, affirm the denial of liability for adjustment disorder and alcohol dependence or abuse, and set aside the decision concerning spondylolisthesis and spondylosis, substituting it with a decision that spondylolisthesis was war-caused, effective from 17 April 2000.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Tribunal decides:
(a) to vary the decision of the VRB where it amended the diagnosis concerning lumbar spondylosis by including a diagnosis of spondylolisthesis and spondylolysis by amending that diagnosis to one of spondylolisthesis; and
(b) to vary the diagnosis of the VRB of adjustment disorder to anxiety disorder; and
(c) to affirm the decision of the VRB in relation to denying liability for the conditions of adjustment disorder and alcohol dependence or alcohol abuse; and
(d) to set aside the decision under review concerning spondylolisthesis and spondylosis and substitutes its decision that the condition of spondylolisthesis is war-caused; and
(e) the date of effect is 17 April 2000.
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.