Rowley and Repatriation Commission (Veterans' entitlements)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision of the Repatriation Commission concerning claims made by the Applicant for diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic peripheral vascular disease, which the Applicant asserted were defence-caused conditions under the *Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986* (Cth). The Applicant had served in the Royal Australian Navy between 1966 and 1973, with his defence service under the Act specifically identified as from December 1972 to August 1973. The Commission had previously decided that these conditions were not related to the Applicant's service.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Applicant's diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic peripheral vascular disease were defence-caused. This involved determining whether the Applicant's smoking, which he contended was initiated and exacerbated by his naval service, was sufficiently linked to these conditions. The Applicant argued that his smoking commenced at age 16 during his naval training due to stress, social pressure, and boredom, and that cigarettes were readily available and inexpensive. He stated his smoking rate increased during his service, particularly during periods of inactivity.

The Tribunal considered the Applicant's evidence regarding the commencement and progression of his smoking habit during service. However, it also noted medical records from 1996, 2009, and 2015 which referred to durations of smoking history (e.g., "past 20 years," "35 years of cigs," "Ex-smoker 40 years") that, when considered with the Applicant's stated age of commencement, suggested a start date for smoking after his naval service. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the Applicant had discharged the onus of proof, which required him to establish on the balance of probabilities that his smoking, and consequently his claimed conditions, were defence-caused. The Tribunal found that the Applicant's diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic peripheral vascular disease were not defence-caused injuries or diseases for the purposes of section 70 of the Act.