Searle and Repatriation Commission (Veterans' entitlements)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the entitlement of Mr Searle to a disability pension under the *Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986* (VEA) for lumbar spondylosis and bilateral hip osteoarthritis. The dispute arose after the Repatriation Commission rejected Mr Searle's claim, a decision affirmed by the Veterans' Review Board (VRB). Mr Searle sought a review of the VRB's decision before the AAT.

The AAT was required to determine whether the material before it raised a connection between Mr Searle's claimed medical conditions and his eligible defence service. This involved assessing whether a Statement of Principles (SOP) in force at the relevant time upheld the contention that either or both conditions were caused by his defence service on the balance of probabilities. The Tribunal also had to consider the applicability of different SOPs that had been in force sequentially and the potential for accrued rights under earlier SOPs.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the requirements of the applicable SOPs for lumbar spondylosis and bilateral hip osteoarthritis. For bilateral hip osteoarthritis, the relevant SOP required specific heavy lifting or prolonged squatting/kneeling for at least two years before the clinical onset of the condition, with the onset occurring within 25 years of the service. The Tribunal found that Mr Searle's clinical onset of hip osteoarthritis occurred more than 25 years after his defence service, thus failing to meet this criterion. Similarly, the Tribunal considered the requirements for lumbar spondylosis, noting the change in SOPs and the principles established in *Repatriation Commission v Gorton*, which allow for reliance on accrued rights under earlier SOPs if current SOPs do not uphold the hypothesis. However, the decision text indicates that the specific findings regarding the lumbar spondylosis SOP were not detailed in the provided extract, but the overall outcome suggests it also did not support the claim.

The reviewable decision of the VRB, dated 18 August 2021, was affirmed by the AAT.