Statement of Principles concerning asbestosis No. 56 of 2013

Administered by Department of Veterans' Affairs

Legislation au F2013L01644 Not in force Legislative Instrument

Legislation content

REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY

 

INSTRUMENT NO. 56 of 2013

 

VETERANS’ ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986

MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004

 

EXPLANATORY NOTES FOR TABLING

 

 

  1. The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority), under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA), revokes Instrument No. 24 of 2005, determined under subsection 196B(3) of the VEA concerning asbestosis.

 

2.             The Authority is of the view that on the sound medical-scientific evidence available it is more probable than not that asbestosis and death from asbestosis can be related to particular kinds of service.  The Authority has therefore determined pursuant to subsection 196B(3) of the VEA a Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 56 of 2013 concerning asbestosis.  This Instrument will in effect replace the revoked Statement of Principles.

 

3.             The provisions of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA) relating to claims for compensation commenced on 1 July 2004.  Claims under section 319 of the MRCA for acceptance of liability for a service injury sustained, a service disease contracted or service death on or after 1 July 2004 are determined by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission by reference to Statements of Principles issued by the Authority pursuant to the VEA.

 

4.             The Statement of Principles sets out the factors that must exist, and which of those factors must be related to the following kinds of service rendered by a person:

 

 eligible war service (other than operational service) under the VEA;

 defence service (other than hazardous service and British nuclear test defence service) under the VEA;

 peacetime service under the MRCA,

 

before it can be said that, on the balance of probabilities, asbestosis or death from asbestosis is connected with the circumstances of that service.

 

5.             This Instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 3 November 2010 concerning asbestosis in accordance with section 196G of the VEA.  The investigation involved an examination of the sound medical-scientific evidence now available to the Authority, including the sound medical-scientific evidence it has previously considered.

 

6.             The contents of this Instrument are in similar terms as the revoked Instrument.  Comparing this Instrument and the revoked Instrument, the differences include:

 

  • adopting the latest revised Instrument format, which commenced in 2005;
  • revising factor 6(a) concerning 'inhaling respirable asbestos fibres in an enclosed space';
  • revising factor 6(b) concerning 'inhaling respirable asbestos fibres in an open environment';
  • revising factor 6(c) concerning 'inhaling respirable asbestos fibres';
  • revising the definitions of 'ICD-10-AM code' and 'relevant service' in clause 9;
  • deleting the definitions of 'an enclosed space' and 'respirable asbestos fibres'; and
  • specifying a date of effect for the Instrument in clause 11.

 

7.             Further changes to the format of the Instrument reflect the commencement of the MRCA and clarify that pursuant to subsection 196B(3A) of the VEA, the Statement of Principles has been determined for the purposes of both the VEA and the MRCA.

 

8.             Prior to determining this Instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to asbestosis in the Government Notices Gazette of 3 November 2010, and circulated a copy of the notice of intention to investigate to a wide range of organisations representing veterans, service personnel and their dependants.  The Authority invited submissions from the Repatriation Commission, organisations and persons referred to in section 196E of the VEA, and any person having expertise in the field.  One submission was received for consideration by the Authority during the investigation.

 

9.             This instrument is compatible with the Human Rights and Freedoms recognised or declared in the International Instruments listed in Section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011. A Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights follows.

 

10.         The determining of this Instrument finalises the investigation in relation to asbestosis as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 3 November 2010.

 

11.         A list of references relating to the above condition is available to any person or organisation referred to in subsection 196E(1)(a) to (c) of the VEA.  Any such request must be made in writing to the Repatriation Medical Authority at the following address:

 

The Registrar

Repatriation Medical Authority

GPO Box 1014

BRISBANE    QLD    4001

Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

(Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011)

 

Instrument No.:   Statement of Principles No. 56 of 2013

Kind of Injury, Disease or Death: Asbestosis

 

This Legislative Instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Overview of the Legislative Instrument

1. This Legislative Instrument is determined pursuant to subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA) for the purposes of the VEA and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA).

2. This Legislative Instrument:-

  • facilitates claimants in making, and the Repatriation Commission in assessing, claims under the VEA and the MRCA respectively, by specifying the circumstances in which medical treatment and compensation can be extended to eligible persons who have asbestosis;
  • facilitates the review of such decisions by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal;
  • outlines the factors which the current sound medical-scientific evidence indicates must exist before it can be said that, on the balance of probabilities, asbestosis is connected with the circumstances of eligible service rendered by a person, as set out in clause 4 of the Explanatory Notes;
  • replaces Instrument No. 24 of 2005; and
  • reflects developments in the available sound medical-scientific evidence concerning asbestosis which have occurred since that earlier instrument was determined. 

3. The Instrument is assessed as being a technical instrument which improves the medico-scientific quality of outcomes under the VEA and the MRCA. 

Human Rights Implications

4. This Legislative Instrument does not derogate from any human rights. It promotes the human rights of veterans, current and former Defence Force members as well as other persons such as their dependents, including:

  • the right to social security (Art 9, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Art 26, Convention on the Rights of the Child and Art 28, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) by helping to ensure that the qualifying conditions for the benefit are 'reasonable, proportionate and transparent'[1];
  • the right to an adequate standard of living (Art 11, ICSECR; Art 27, CRC and Art 28, CRPD) by facilitating the assessment and determination of social security benefits;
  • the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (Art 12, ICSECR and Art 25, CRPD), by facilitating the assessment and determination of compensation and benefits in relation to the treatment and rehabilitation of veterans and Defence Force members; and
  • the rights of persons with disabilities by facilitating the determination of claims relating to treatment and rehabilitation (Art 26, CRPD).

Conclusion

This Legislative Instrument is compatible with human rights as it does not derogate from and promotes a number of human rights.

 

Repatriation Medical Authority

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] In General Comment No. 19 (The right to social security), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights said (at paragraph 24) this to be one of the elements of ensuring accessibility to social security.

Overview

The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 56 of 2013, concerning asbestosis, was enacted in response to the need for updated medical-scientific evidence regarding the connection between asbestosis and specific kinds of service. The Instrument was created under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and serves to replace the previously revoked Instrument No. 24 of 2005. This legislative instrument facilitates the assessment of claims by veterans and Defence Force members for medical treatment and compensation related to asbestosis, aligning with the sound medical-scientific evidence available. It outlines the circumstances in which asbestosis can be connected to eligible service, thus promoting human rights such as the right to social security, an adequate standard of living, and the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. The instrument was determined following an investigation into asbestosis, which involved a review of available medical-scientific evidence and public consultation.

Scope and Application

The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 56 of 2013, which amends Instrument No. 24 of 2005, concerns the determination of Statements of Principles regarding asbestosis under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. This Instrument applies to veterans, current and former Defence Force members, and other eligible persons who have contracted asbestosis, aiming to specify the circumstances in which medical treatment and compensation can be extended. The Instrument applies to particular kinds of service, including eligible war service, defence service, and peacetime service, and sets out the factors that must exist to connect asbestosis or death from asbestosis with service circumstances. The Authority’s decision is based on sound medical-scientific evidence, and the Instrument facilitates claims and assessments under both the Veterans’ Entitlements Act and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act, ensuring a comprehensive approach to veterans’ compensation. The Instrument also ensures that the process aligns with human rights, promoting rights such as social security, adequate living standards, and health, without derogating from any human rights.

Key Provisions

The Repatriation Medical Authority (RMA), exercising its powers under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA), has revoked Instrument No. 24 of 2005 and issued Instrument No. 56 of 2013 concerning asbestosis. This new instrument replaces the previous one and incorporates the latest sound medical-scientific evidence, setting out the specific circumstances under which asbestosis or death from asbestosis can be connected to service rendered by a person. This includes eligible war service, defence service, and peacetime service as outlined in clause 4 of the explanatory notes. The obligations imposed by this legislation primarily concern claimants and the Repatriation Commission. Claimants must demonstrate that their asbestosis or related death occurred under the conditions specified in the Statement of Principles, which detail the requisite factors and their connection to the service rendered. The Repatriation Commission is tasked with assessing these claims in accordance with the factors specified in the Statement of Principles, ensuring that the claims are evaluated based on the latest medical-scientific evidence. The Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, under section 319 of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA), must also refer to these Statements of Principles when determining claims for compensation for injuries, diseases, or deaths occurring on or after 1 July 2004. Breach of the requirements set forth in this legislation may lead to civil or administrative consequences. For example, failure by claimants to provide sufficient evidence to meet the criteria in the Statement of Principles may result in the denial of their claims. Conversely, if the Repatriation Commission fails to correctly apply the Statement of Principles in assessing claims, it may face legal challenges or reviews by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. While specific penalties are not detailed in the explanatory notes, the implications of non-compliance could include financial repercussions for claimants or reputational damage for the Commission.

Legal classification tags

Area of Law
Veterans' Law
Health Law
Instrument
Legislative Instrument
Concepts
Definitions & Interpretation
Reporting & Disclosure Obligations
Rights & Protections

Interactions

Authorises

All Versions

Sourced from the Federal Register of Legislation at 26 August 2026. For the latest information on Australian Government law please go to https://www.legislation.gov.au.