Thomas and Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal regarding a claim for compensation for dental conditions, including periodontitis, subgingival calculus, gingivitis, periodontal abscess, tooth wear, and loss of teeth. The appellant, Mr. Thomas, sought compensation from the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission for these conditions, alleging they were contributed to by his defence service.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the claimed dental conditions could be diagnosed and, crucially, whether Mr. Thomas's defence service had materially contributed to these conditions. The Tribunal was required to interpret the meaning of "material degree" in the context of the relevant legislation, particularly in light of amendments made in 2007, and to assess the weight and reliability of the medical evidence presented.

The Tribunal considered reports from Dr. Brendan Nasser, a general dentist engaged by the Commission. Dr. Nasser's reports, based on a paper review rather than a clinical examination, indicated a history of periodontal disease dating back to May 1991. While Dr. Nasser acknowledged that severe periodontitis can lead to tooth loss and that plaque is the primary cause of periodontal disease, he was unable to definitively diagnose the presence of all claimed conditions due to the lack of a clinical examination. The Tribunal noted that s 5B(3) defines "significant degree" as "substantially more than material," implying that a "material degree" is a less stringent threshold. However, the Tribunal ultimately concluded that periodontal disease was not materially contributed to by Mr. Thomas's defence service.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the reviewable decisions of 6 December 2019. As the underlying periodontal disease was not found to be materially contributed to by defence service, any resultant loss of teeth was also deemed not to be a compensable injury.