Statement of Principles concerning Barrett's oesophagus (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 67 of 2016)

Administered by Department of Veterans' Affairs

Legislation au F2016L01135 Not in force Legislative Instrument

Legislation content

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

 

STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES CONCERNING

BARRETT'S OESOPHAGUS

(REASONABLE HYPOTHESIS) (NO. 67 OF 2016)

 

VETERANS’ ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986

MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004

 

  1. This is the Explanatory Statement to the Statement of Principles concerning Barrett's oesophagus (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 67 of 2016).

Background

2.             The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) has determined, under subsection 196B(2) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA), Statement of Principles concerning Barrett's oesophagus (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 67 of 2016).

3.             The Authority is of the view that there is sound medical-scientific evidence that indicates that Barrett's oesophagus and death from Barrett's oesophagus can be related to particular kinds of service.  The Authority has therefore determined this Statement of Principles concerning Barrett's oesophagus pursuant to subsection 196B(2) of the VEA.

Purpose and Operation

4.             The Statement of Principles will be applied in determining claims under the VEA and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA).

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

 operational service under the VEA;

 peacekeeping service under the VEA;

 hazardous service under the VEA;

 British nuclear test defence service under the VEA;

 warlike service under the MRCA;

 non-warlike service under the MRCA,

before it can be said that a reasonable hypothesis has been raised connecting Barrett's oesophagus or death from Barrett's oesophagus, with the circumstances of that service.  The Statement of Principles has been determined for the purposes of both the VEA and the MRCA.

6.             The Repatriation Commission, Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, Veterans’ Review Board or Administrative Appeals Tribunal cannot accept any claim for pension; or a claim for liability or compensation relating to Barrett's oesophagus or death from Barrett's oesophagus that was lodged on or after 1 June 1994 in the case of the VEA, or 1 July 2004 in the case of the MRCA respectively, unless this Statement of Principles upholds that claim (subsection 120A(3) of the VEA or subsection 338(3) of the MRCA).

7.             This new Instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 1 September 2015 concerning Barrett's oesophagus in accordance with section 196G of the VEA.  The investigation involved an examination of the sound medical-scientific evidence available to the Authority.

Consultation

8.             Prior to determining this Instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to Barrett's oesophagus in the Government Notices Gazette of 1 September 2015, 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.

Human Rights

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.

Finalisation of Investigation

10.         The determining of this new Instrument finalises the investigation in relation to Barrett's oesophagus as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 1 September 2015.

References

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. 67 of 2016

Kind of Injury, Disease or Death: Barrett's oesophagus

 

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).  Part XIA of the VEA requires the determination of these instruments outlining the factors linking particular kinds of injury, disease or death with service such being determined solely on the available sound medical-scientific evidence.

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 Barrett's oesophagus;
  • facilitates the review of such decisions by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; and
  • outlines the factors which the current sound medical-scientific evidence indicates must as a minimum exist, before it can be said that a reasonable hypothesis has been raised, connecting Barrett's oesophagus with the circumstances of eligible service rendered by a person, as set out in clause 5 of the Explanatory Statement.

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;
  • the rights of persons with disabilities by facilitating the determination of claims relating to treatment and rehabilitation (Art 26, CRPD); and
  • ensuring that those rights "will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status" (Art 2, ICESCR).

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 Statement of Principles concerning Barrett's oesophagus (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 67 of 2016) was enacted in 2016 to address the gap in recognising the link between Barrett's oesophagus and military service, ensuring that veterans could claim appropriate benefits. This Statement of Principles was determined by the Repatriation Medical Authority under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). Its purpose is to specify the minimum factors that must be present to establish a reasonable hypothesis connecting Barrett's oesophagus or death from Barrett's oesophagus with certain types of military service. The enactment aims to facilitate the assessment and review of claims for benefits related to Barrett's oesophagus, ensuring that claims are supported by sound medical-scientific evidence. This legislative instrument promotes human rights by facilitating access to social security, adequate living standards, and healthcare for veterans and their dependents without discrimination.

Scope and Application

The Statement of Principles concerning Barrett's oesophagus (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 67 of 2016) applies to veterans, current and former Defence Force members, and other eligible persons who have developed Barrett's oesophagus and seeks to facilitate claims under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. This legislative instrument sets out the circumstances in which a reasonable hypothesis can be raised connecting Barrett's oesophagus or death from Barrett's oesophagus with particular kinds of service, such as operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, British nuclear test defence, warlike, and non-warlike service. It is determined on the basis of sound medical-scientific evidence, and its primary purpose is to improve the medico-scientific quality of outcomes for eligible claimants, ensuring that they receive appropriate medical treatment and compensation. The application of this Statement of Principles is national in scope, affecting all claimants who meet the specified criteria within Australia. There are no stated exclusions or thresholds, but claims must be lodged after the publication of the Statement of Principles and be supported by the stipulated medical evidence. The application of this Statement of Principles can be further extended or restricted through subordinate instruments, which may provide additional guidelines or criteria for assessing claims.

Key Provisions

The main operative sections of the Statement of Principles concern Barrett's oesophagus (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 67 of 2016) (the Instrument), as outlined in subsection 196B(2) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA), establish the criteria and conditions for connecting Barrett's oesophagus, or death from Barrett's oesophagus, with particular kinds of military service. These kinds of service include operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, British nuclear test defence service, warlike, and non-warlike service, as defined under the VEA and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). This Statement of Principles is critical for determining claims for pensions or compensation related to Barrett's oesophagus that were lodged on or after the specified dates under each Act. The Instrument imposes several obligations on parties involved in claims related to Barrett's oesophagus. For instance, it mandates that any claim for pension or compensation concerning Barrett's oesophagus or death from Barrett's oesophagus must be assessed in accordance with the factors outlined in the Statement of Principles. This means that claims must demonstrate a reasonable hypothesis connecting the condition with the relevant service, as specified. The Repatriation Commission, Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, Veterans’ Review Board, or Administrative Appeals Tribunal cannot accept any such claims that do not meet the criteria set out in the Instrument (subsection 120A(3) of the VEA and subsection 338(3) of the MRCA). Furthermore, the Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) must ensure that the determination of the Statement of Principles is based on sound medical-scientific evidence. The Instrument also sets out the consequences for non-compliance. There are no explicit offences listed within the text; however, any claim that does not adhere to the criteria set out in the Statement of Principles will be rejected. For example, a claim for compensation that fails to establish a reasonable hypothesis linking Barrett's oesophagus with the service rendered will not be accepted. Additionally, the Authority has the power to review and assess the claims, ensuring that only those meeting the specified criteria are considered valid. This ensures that benefits and compensation are provided fairly and based on credible evidence, thereby maintaining the integrity of the claims process under both the VEA and the MRCA. In terms of penalties, the text does not specify any criminal or civil penalties for breaches of the Instrument. However, the rejection of claims that do not meet the criteria can have significant implications for claimants, potentially denying them the benefits and compensation they are entitled to. The focus of the Instrument is on ensuring that claims are assessed based on sound medical-scientific evidence, rather than imposing punitive measures for non-compliance. This approach aims to provide a fair and transparent process for claimants while safeguarding the integrity of the compensation system.

Legal classification tags

Area of Law
Veterans' Law
Instrument
Explanatory Statement
Concepts
Definitions & Interpretation
Reporting & Disclosure Obligations
Human Rights Law

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.