Rogers and Repatriation Commission (Veterans' entitlements)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Repatriation Commission to refuse a partner service pension to the applicant, Moira Rogers. The applicant, born in Scotland, had been a permanent resident of New Zealand since 1972 and remained resident there. Her husband, Guy Rogers, an Australian veteran, had served in the Royal Australian Navy and was resident in New Zealand since 1983. The dispute centred on whether the applicant met the Australian residency requirements for a partner service pension under the *Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986* (Cth).

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant satisfied the Australian residency requirements as set out in section 38H of the *Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986*. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the applicant qualified as an "Australian resident" for the purposes of the Act and whether she was physically present in Australia on the day her claim was lodged, as required by that section. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant was in receipt of a specified payment that would allow her to meet the residency requirements under section 38H(2).

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant did not meet the criteria under section 38H of the Act. It found that she was not an "Australian resident" as defined by section 5G(1AA) of the Act, nor was she in Australia on the day her claim was lodged. Furthermore, the Tribunal determined that the applicant was not in receipt of a specified payment that would satisfy the alternative residency requirement under section 38H(2). Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant was not eligible for a partner service pension.

The decision under review, which affirmed the delegate's determination that the applicant was not entitled to a partner service pension, was affirmed by the Tribunal.