Reidlinger and Repatriation Commission (Veterans’ entitlements)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Robin Reidlinger (the applicant) to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of a decision by the Repatriation Commission (the respondent) and the Veterans’ Review Board. The applicant sought an increase in his disability pension to the special rate, as provided by section 24 of the *Veterans’ Entitlement Act 1986* (Cth). The respondent had previously determined that the applicant's pension should be increased to 100% of the general rate, a decision affirmed by the Veterans’ Review Board.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant satisfied the criteria for the special rate of pension under section 24(2A) of the Act. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant was prevented from continuing his last remunerative work solely because of incapacity from war-caused injury or disease, and if this incapacity resulted in a loss of earnings that would not have been suffered if he were free from that incapacity. The applicant had been operating a newsagency business with his wife and had ceased trading shortly before lodging his claim.

The Tribunal considered the settled principle, as reaffirmed in *Repatriation Commission v Watkins*, that the "alone" requirement in section 24(2A)(d) is not satisfied if non-war-caused factors play a part in preventing a veteran from engaging in remunerative work, even if those factors are of secondary importance. In this case, while the applicant's war-caused mental condition was a factor, the Tribunal found that financial considerations also played a part in the decision to cease operating the business. Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the applicant did not satisfy the "alone" requirement and was therefore not eligible for the special rate of pension.

Despite affirming the decision that the applicant was not eligible for the special rate, the Tribunal considered that the applicant's entitlement to the Extreme Disablement Adjustment rate of pension should be assessed. The Tribunal remitted the matter to the respondent for reconsideration of the applicant's eligibility for this alternative rate of pension.