Robert Breakspear v Repatriation Commission

Case [2011] AATA 524

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2011] AATA 524

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )           Nos   2008/4150,

VETERANS'      AFFAIRS        DIVISION        )   2009/1360     )  

Re ROBERT BREAKSPEAR

Applicant

And

REPATRIATION COMMISSION

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Senior Member Egon Fice

Date28 July 2011

PlaceMelbourne

Decision

The Tribunal affirms the decisions made by the Veterans’ Review Board on 7 July 2008 and on 10 March 2009.

..........[sgd] Egon Fice...............

Senior Member

VETERANS’ AFFAIRS – Royal Australian Air Force – South Vietnam – War service – Disability Pension – Depression – Generalised anxiety disorder – Alcohol abuse – Adjustment disorder – Post Traumatic Stress Disorder – Traumatic event – Standard of proof – Operational service – Defence service

Repatriation Act 1920

Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 ss 5C, 6F, 7, 9, 13(1), 68, 69(1), 70(1), 120, 120(1), 120(3), 120(4), 120A, 120A(2), 120A(3), 120B, 120B(2), 120B(3) 196B(2), 196B(3), 196B(11), 196G

Byrnes v Repatriation Commission (1993) 177 CLR 564

Government Insurance Office (NSW) v R J Green and Lloyd Pty Ltd (1966) 114 CLR 437

Law v Repatriation Commission (1980) 29 ALR 64

McKenna v Repatriation Commission (1999) 86 FCR 144

Mines v Repatriation Commission [2004] 86 ALD 62

Repatriation Commission v Cornelius [2002] FCA 750

Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82

Repatriation Commission v Gorton (2001) 110 FCR 321

Repatriation Commission v Hill (2002) 69 ALD 581

Repatriation Commission v Keeley (2000) 98 FCR 108

Repatriation Commission v Law (1981) 147 CLR 635

Repatriation Commission v Smith (1987) 15 FCR 327

Re Raymond Bowd and Repatriation Commission [2011] AATA 59

Re Robertson and Repatriation Commission (1998) 50 ALD 668

Roncevich v Repatriation Commission (2005) 218 ALR 733

Walsh v Rother District Council [1978] 1 ALL ER 510

Statement of Principles – Alcohol Dependence and Alcohol Abuse – Instrument No 1 of 2009

Statement of Principles – Alcohol Dependence and Alcohol Abuse – Instrument No 2 of 2009

Statement of Principles - Anxiety Disorder – Instrument No 101 of 2007

Statement of Principles - Anxiety Disorder – Instrument No 102 of 2007

Statement of Principles – Post Traumatic Stress Disorder - Instrument No 5 of 2008

Statement of Principles – Post Traumatic Stress Disorder - Instrument No 3 of 1999 as amended by No 54 of 1999

4th Edn American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

Ham, Paul ‘Vietnam: The Australian War’ (Harper Collins Publishers, 2004)

REASONS FOR DECISION

28 July 2011 Senior Member Egon Fice

1.      Mr Robert William Breakspear served in the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) between 9 January 1967 and 8 January 1987.  After completing apprentice training, he qualified as an airframe fitter in June 1969.  He commenced duties as a Loadmaster on Caribou aircraft with 38 Squadron at Richmond in November 1973.  Mr Breakspear was posted to Butterworth Transport Support Flight (TSF) on 16 October 1974, remaining there until April 1977.  In the course of his posting to Butterworth TSF, where he carried out loadmaster duties associated with TSF operations of a C47B (Dakota) aircraft,…

Continue reading Robert Breakspear v Repatriation Commission

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Robert Breakspear v Repatriation Commission [2011] AATA 524
Case
[2011] AATA 524
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Robert Breakspear initiated proceedings against the Repatriation Commission in a case that was ultimately decided by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Mr Breakspear sought to overturn the decisions made by the Veterans’ Review Board, which had denied his claim for compensation on two separate occasions. The central dispute revolved around Mr Breakspear’s assertion that his medical condition, which he claimed to be related to his service in the military, was not appropriately assessed by the Review Board.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Review Board had erred in its assessment of Mr Breakspear’s medical evidence and in its determination of the causal link between his medical condition and his service. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the Board had applied the correct legal principles in its review of Mr Breakspear’s case and whether there was any material error in its findings that his condition did not meet the criteria for compensation under the relevant legislation.

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal examined the evidence presented to the Review Board and the Board’s reasoning in its decisions. The Tribunal found that the Board had considered all relevant evidence and had applied the correct legal standards in its assessment. The Tribunal was satisfied that the Board had not made any material error in its findings and that its decisions were supported by the evidence. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decisions of the Review Board and dismissed Mr Breakspear’s appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Tribunal affirms the decisions made by the Veterans’ Review Board on 7 July 2008 and on 10 March 2009.

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.