Repatriation Comm v Keeley

The case of *Repatriation Comm v Keeley* concerned an appeal by the Repatriation Commission against a decision of the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute centred on the eligibility of Mr. Keeley for a pension under the *Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986* (Cth) (the Act). The core of the disagreement lay in whether Mr. Keeley's condition, a psychiatric disorder, was attributable to his defence service.

The primary legal issue before Gaudron and Hayne JJ was whether the Repatriation Commission had correctly applied the provisions of the Act, specifically concerning the onus of proof and the standard of proof required to establish that a particular condition was not war-caused. The court was required to determine if the Commission had discharged its obligation to show that Mr. Keeley's psychiatric disorder was not attributable to his defence service, or if the evidence supported a finding that it was.

The court's reasoning focused on the interpretation of section 120 of the Act, which places the onus on the Commission to prove that a condition is not war-caused. Gaudron and Hayne JJ held that the Commission had failed to discharge this onus. They found that the evidence presented did not sufficiently establish that Mr. Keeley's psychiatric disorder was not attributable to his defence service, and therefore, the presumption in favour of the veteran under the Act should prevail. The court affirmed the principles that the Commission bears the burden of proof and that this burden must be discharged on the balance of probabilities.