Repatriation Commission v Codd

Case [2005] FCA 888


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Repatriation Commission v Codd [2005] FCA 888

REPATRIATION COMMISSION  v  KATHLEEN M CODD

V 1152 of 2004

RYAN J

30 JUNE 2005
MELBOURNE


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

V 1152 of 2004

On appeal from the Veterans’ Appeals Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal

BETWEEN:

REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Applicant

AND:

KATHLEEN M CODD
Respondent

JUDGE:

RYAN J

DATE OF ORDER:

30 JUNE 2005

WHERE MADE:

MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.        The application by way of appeal be allowed.

2.        The decision of the Veterans’ Appeals Tribunal made on 20 August 2004 be set aside.

3.The matter be remitted to the Tribunal to be heard and determined according to law.

4.There be no order as to costs.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

V 1152 of 2004

On appeal from the Veterans’ Appeals Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal

BETWEEN:

REPATRIATION COMMISSION
Applicant

AND:

KATHLEEN M CODD
Respondent

JUDGE:

RYAN J

DATE:

JUNE 2005

PLACE:

MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

  1. This is an application by way of appeal from a decision of the Veterans’ Appeals Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) made on 20 August 2004.  By that decision, the Tribunal set aside the decision of the applicant Repatriation Commission that the death of the late Ronald Kevin Codd (“the veteran”) was not war-caused and substituted a decision, that the death of the veteran was war-caused.

    Background facts

  2. The veteran had served in the Australian Army from 5 October 1942 until 9 August 1946.  Between 2 January 1945 and February 1945 he served with 2/4 Dental Unit.  He was then diagnosed with cognitive nystagmus and returned to Australia in February 1945.  His service had been with the 2/1st Field Ambulance Service to which was attached a Dental Unit.  Among the veteran’s war-caused disabilities were infected tonsils, chronic eczema and mild labile hypertension.

  3. On 7 December 1968 the veteran was killed when a timber truck which he was driving was struck by a train at a level crossing at Benalla in country Victoria.  At a subsequent coroner’s inquest there was evidence that the veteran’s view of the approaching train had been impaired or blocked by the rising sun.  There was evidence to the effect that the concentration of alcohol in the veteran’s blood at the time of the collision was equivalent to that which would have been brought about by the consumption of one seven-ounce glass of beer.  There was also evidence before the Tribunal from the respondent who had met the veteran in 1950 and married him on 16 August 1952.  That evidence included these passages;

    ‘I understand from talking to Ron's family that he was a non-drinker before the war. I understand that he commenced drinking during his service. It is my recollection that he was a nervy man when I met him. I recall that from the beginning of our marriage he was…

Continue reading Repatriation Commission v Codd

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Repatriation Commission v Codd [2005] FCA 888
Case
[2005] FCA 888
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Repatriation Commission filed an appeal against a decision of the Veterans' Appeals Tribunal which held that the death of Ronald Kevin Codd, a former serviceman, was war-caused. The Tribunal's decision overturned the Repatriation Commission's determination that the veteran's death was not related to his war service. The veteran had served in the Australian Army and was diagnosed with cognitive nystagmus during his service, leading to his return to Australia in 1945. He was later killed in a road accident in 1968, and his widow provided evidence about his post-war drinking habits and psychological state. The Tribunal's decision was based on the belief that the veteran's war-related conditions, including anxiety and hypertension, may have contributed to the accident.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Tribunal had correctly applied the law in determining that the veteran's death was war-caused. Specifically, the court needed to assess if the Tribunal had properly evaluated the evidence and considered the relevant statutory provisions and guidelines. The court also had to determine whether the Tribunal's decision was in accordance with the applicable law and if it contained any errors of fact or law.

The court found that the Tribunal had erred in its decision by not considering the Repatriation Commission's hypothesis about the veteran's Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD) and its applicability to the facts. The Tribunal failed to examine whether the hypothesis was reasonable and aligned with the statutory provisions. Furthermore, the court identified that the Tribunal had overlooked a key factor in the statutory guidelines concerning the onset of anxiety disorders following severe psychological stressors during service. The absence of evidence supporting the onset of relevant symptoms within the specified time frame constituted a separate error of law by the Tribunal.

In conclusion, the court held that the Tribunal's decision contained legal errors and did not follow the applicable law. The appeal was allowed, the Tribunal's decision was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration according to law. No order for costs was made as the Repatriation Commission did not seek an order for the respondent to pay costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application by way of appeal be allowed.

2. The decision of the Veterans’ Appeals Tribunal made on 20 August 2004 be set aside.

3. The matter be remitted to the Tribunal to be heard and determined according to law.

4. There be no order as to costs.

Background

Background to the litigation

This is an application by way of appeal from a decision of the Veterans’ Appeals Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) made on 20 August 2004. By that decision, the Tribunal set aside the decision of the applicant Repatriation Commission that the death of the late Ronald Kevin Codd (“the veteran”) was not war-caused and substituted a decision, that the death of the veteran was war-caused.Background facts The veteran had served in the Australian Army from 5 October 1942 until 9 August 1946. Between 2 January 1945 and February 1945 he served with 2/4 Dental Unit. He was then diagnosed with cognitive nystagmus and returned to Australia in February 1945. His service had been with the 2/1st Field Ambulance Service to which was attached a Dental Unit. Among the veteran’s war-caused disabilities were infected tonsils, chronic eczema and mild labile hypertension. On 7 December 1968 the veteran was killed when a timber truck which he was driving was struck by a train at a level crossing at Benalla in country Victoria. At a subsequent coroner’s inquest there was evidence that the veteran’s view of the approaching train had been impaired or blocked by the rising sun. There was evidence to the effect that the concentration of alcohol in the veteran’s blood at the time of the collision was equivalent to that which would have been brought about by the consumption of one seven-ounce glass of beer. There was also evidence before the Tribunal from the respondent who had met the veteran in 1950 and married him on 16 August 1952. That evidence included these passages;‘I understand from talking to Ron's family that he was a non-drinker before the war. I understand that he commenced drinking during his service. It is my recollection that he was a nervy man when I met him. I recall that from the beginning of our marriage he was a restless sleeper and suffered frequent nightmares. He would scream in his sleep words such as "don't, don't" and "here it comes, here it comes". He was a man who was easily upset and sudden noises and the loud noise of children irritated him.Ron did talk to me about his war service on occasions. He seemed particularly upset by his experiences as a Stretcher Bearer in New Guinea and told me of incidents when he carried bodies and wounded men who had been shot for long distances.Ron suffered a nervous twitch which involved jerking his head. He was often verbally aggressive-particularly if he consumed too much liquor.Ron was a regular drinker when I met him; he drank every day. I noticed that he drank excessively if he was stressed. I believe that he self-medicated on alcohol in order to settle his nerves. He frequently drank to excess during our marriage. He tended to become morose when intoxicated.Ron's drinking caused a lot of disharmony and we had many disputes over it. These disputes did not cause him to change his ways. Not only was he morose and abusive when intoxicated but I was also concerned that he squandered a significant proportion of his wage on alcohol so that I needed to obtain employment in order to support the family. There were a number of times when I considered leaving Ron.On the evening before Ron's death he came home late from the Hotel. I gathered that he had been drinking for some hours. I was in bed when he arrived home at about 10.30pm. He was intoxicated. He got into bed beside me and then became very agitated about a blow fly which was buzzing around our bedroom. One of his superstitions had been that a blow fly flying around after going to bed indicated a forthcoming death. I recall that I got out of bed in order to kill the fly with insecticide because he was so restless. I then fell asleep.… … …My husband had continued to suffer nightmares and restlessness at night right up until the time of his death.… … …Ron did suffer hypertension which was accepted as war caused. He took medication for that condition and his treating doctor at the time was Dr. J. Alexander of Nunn Street, Benalla. Ron did on occasions complain to me of feeling light-headed and sometimes this symptoms. came on when he was simply sitting down. I believe that that symptom may be related to his hypertension. It may well be that he suffered such an episode immediately before arriving at the intersection such as to impair his concentration.I also believe that his war caused anxiety/nervous condition may have aggravated the condition which caused him to jerk his head leading to a loss of concentration and that this may have also played a part in the collision.’

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

However, even if I be wrong in holding that there was no sufficient evidence to support a finding that the veteran suffered from GAD, the Tribunal also failed to consider whether the hypothesis raised by the applicant was reasonable, that is, whether it fitted with the ‘template’ to be found in the SoP. In particular, it is impossible to discern from the evidence relied on by the Tribunal how one of the factors set out in cl 5 of the SoP must have been related to any relevant service rendered by the veteran. Because of the concession on behalf of the applicant that the veteran may have suffered a severe psychological stressor between January and August 1945, the Tribunal appears to have assumed that factor (a)(ii) of cl 5 of the SoP existed. However, that factor required the clinical onset of anxiety disorder not later than two years after the veteran experienced the severe psychological stressor. In this case that must have been not later than August 1947. The absence of any evidence at all of relevant symptoms before 1950 signifies a separate and additional error of law by the Tribunal.Conclusion For the reasons which I have endeavoured to explain the application by way of appeal should be allowed and the decision of the Tribunal of 20 August 2004 must be set aside. The matter will be remitted to the Tribunal to be heard and determined according to law. Ms Macdonnell did not seek an order that the respondent pay the applicant Commission’s costs. In the circumstances, I consider that the applicant was correct in taking that stance. There will therefore be no order as to costs.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.