Rossiter and Repatriation Commission - [2005] AATA 178

Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2005] AATA 178
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No Q2003/866

VETERANS’ APPEALS DIVISION )

Re GREGORY ROSSITER

Applicant

And

REPATRIATION COMMISSION

Respondent

DECISION
Tribunal Senior Member B J McCabe
Dr K Kennedy, Member

Date 3 March 2005
PlaceBrisbane

Decision
The decision under review is set aside. The Tribunal finds that:

1.     The applicant suffered from adjustment disorder with depressed mood which evolved into his current depressive disorder.

2.     The depressive disorder is attributable to the applicant’s eligible service.

3.     The date of effect is 2 May 2002.

.................[Sgd]........................
SENIOR MEMBER

Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
)No Q2003/866

VETERANS’ APPEALS DIVISION
)

Re GREGORY ROSSITER

Applicant

And

REPATRIATION COMMISSION

Respondent

CORRIGENDUM [2005] AATA 178

Tribunal Senior Member B J McCabe and Dr K Kennedy, Member
Date8 April 2005
PlaceBrisbane

I HEREBY DIRECT that the Decision issued by the Tribunal on 3 Marsh 2005 be amended so that the Decision Page and paragraph 45 of the Reasons read as follows:
§On the Decision Page point 4 be added as follows:
“4. The matter is remitted to the Repatriation Commission for the purpose of assessment.”
§In paragraph 45 of the Reasons after the date of 2 May 2002 the following be added:
“The matter is remitted to the Repatriation Commission for the purpose of assessment."
[Sgd]
SENIOR MEMBER

CATCHWORDS
VETERANS’ AFFAIRS – Veterans’ entitlements – disability pension – war caused injury during operational service – diagnosis of psychiatric condition in issue – post-traumatic stress disorder – adjustment disorder – depressive disorder - date of onset in issue – applicant suffered a psychosocial stressor – applicant suffered from adjustment disorder with depressed mood which evolved into his current depressive disorder – psychiatric condition is attributable to the applicant’s eligible service – decision under review is set aside and substituted accordingly.
Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986, s120
Deledio v Repatriation Commission (1998) 83 FCR 82; (1998) 49 ALD 193; (1998) 27 AAR 144; BC9801313
McKenna v Repatriation Commission (1999) 86 FCR 144; (1999) 29 AAR 70; [1999] FCA 323; BC9901335
Stonehouse and Repatriation Commission [2004] AATA 707.
REASONS FOR DECISION

3 March 2005
introduction
4.      Mr Gregory Rossiter served with the Army in Vietnam. He now suffers from a psychiatric condition. He says the condition is attributable to his experiences while on operational service. The Repatriation Commission disagrees, and its decision was affirmed by the Veterans’ Review Board. Mr Rossiter has now asked the Tribunal to consider his claim.
5.      This case raises difficult questions of diagnosis. The doctors both agree the applicant suffers from a psychiatric condition, but they cannot agree on a precise diagnosis. There is also some dispute over the date of onset of the condition.
6.      We are satisfied the applicant suffers from a compensable condition. We have therefore decided to set aside the determination of the Commission and remit the matter so the amount of the pension entitlement under the Veterans Entitlements Act 1986

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Rossiter and Repatriation Commission

Details

AGLC: Rossiter and Repatriation Commission [2005] AATA 178
Case: [2005] AATA 178
Decision Date: 3 March 2005

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter between Rossiter and the Repatriation Commission was heard in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, concerning the eligibility of a disability pension under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986. The primary issue was whether the applicant, a veteran, suffered from a psychiatric condition that arose from his operational service, specifically post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), adjustment disorder, or depressive disorder, and if so, the date of onset of the condition. The Commission had previously determined that the applicant's condition did not qualify for pension entitlements, a decision the applicant sought to overturn.

The court had to address the nature and onset of the psychiatric conditions diagnosed in the applicant. This involved discerning between adjustment disorder with depressed mood, which evolved into the applicant's current depressive disorder, and PTSD. The evidence presented included expert medical opinions and the applicant's personal accounts of his experiences and symptoms. The Tribunal had to determine whether these conditions were indeed attributable to the applicant's service and whether they met the criteria set out under the relevant legislation.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had suffered from adjustment disorder with depressed mood that later evolved into his current depressive disorder. This condition was found to be attributable to the applicant's eligible service. The Tribunal ruled that the condition began on 2 May 2002, as evidenced by the medical reports and the applicant's testimony. Based on this, the Tribunal set aside the original decision of the Commission and substituted it with a finding that the applicant was entitled to a disability pension.

The Tribunal's final order was that the decision under review was set aside, and it was determined that the applicant suffered from adjustment disorder with depressed mood which evolved into his current depressive disorder, attributable to his eligible service, with the date of effect being 2 May 2002. Consequently, the applicant was entitled to the disability pension from this date.

Orders

Orders of the court

The decision under review is set aside. The Tribunal finds that:

1. The applicant suffered from adjustment disorder with depressed mood which evolved into his current depressive disorder.

2. The depressive disorder is attributable to the applicant’s eligible service.

3. The date of effect is 2 May 2002.

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.