Turner and Repatriation Commission (Veterans' entitlements)

This matter came before Dr I Alexander, Senior Member, concerning Mr Turner's claims for travelling expenses. The core dispute revolved around the fact that the majority of Mr Turner's claims were lodged after the statutory twelve-month time limit stipulated by the *Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986* (VE Act). The central question for determination was whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify the exercise of the discretion to extend this time limit under section 112 of the VE Act.

The Tribunal was required to assess whether Mr Turner's circumstances constituted exceptionality, thereby permitting the retrospective acceptance of his travel expense claims. This involved evaluating his evidence regarding his awareness of his entitlement to claim travel costs, the impact of his mental health condition on his ability to lodge claims within the prescribed period, and the availability of documentation to support his claims. The Tribunal also had to consider the specific periods to which the claims related and whether his alleged incapacity persisted throughout those periods.

Dr Alexander considered Mr Turner's evidence that he was unaware of his entitlement to claim travel expenses until late 2016, having only been informed during a PTSD course. He also noted Mr Turner's assertion that he suffered from severe mental health issues, including auditory hallucinations, which significantly impacted his capacity to manage administrative tasks such as lodging claims. However, the Tribunal found no evidence to support Mr Turner's contention that his incapacity remained unchanged until 2016, leading it to conclude that extending the claim period for travel prior to 19 May 2016 was not justified.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision in respect of claim period two, accepting Mr Turner's claims for travel expenses incurred during 2013 from 2 April 2013. The decision with respect to claim period one, however, was affirmed, meaning claims lodged outside the statutory time limit for that period were not accepted.