Statement of Principles concerning fracture (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 94 of 2015)

Administered by Department of Veterans' Affairs

Legislation au F2015L01340 Not in force Legislative Instrument

Legislation content

REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY

 

INSTRUMENT NO. 94 of 2015

 

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. 53 of 2006, determined under subsection 196B(2) of the VEA concerning fracture.
  2. The Authority is of the view that there is sound medical-scientific evidence that indicates that fracture and death from fracture can be related to particular kinds of service.  The Authority has therefore determined pursuant to subsection 196B(2) of the VEA a Statement of Principles concerning fracture (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 94 of 2015).  This Instrument will in effect replace the revoked Statement of Principles.

Purpose and Operation

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

4.             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 fracture or death from fracture, with the circumstances of that service.  The Statement of Principles has been determined for the purposes of both the VEA and the MRCA.

5.             This Instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 2 May 2012 concerning fracture 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 2015;
  • specifying a day of commencement for the Instrument in section 2;
  • revising factors in subsections 9(1) & 9(13) concerning 'physical trauma';
  • new factor in subsection 9(3) concerning 'significant biomechanical abnormality', for stress fracture of the lower limb only;
  • revising factors in subsections 9(8) & 9(16) concerning 'osteomyelitis';
  • new factors in subsections 9(11) & 9(17) concerning 'osteogenesis imperfecta';
  • new factor in subsection 9(12)(a) concerning 'smoking', for minimal trauma fracture only;
  • new factor in subsection 9(12)(b) concerning 'alcohol' for minimal trauma fracture only;
  • new factor in subsection 9(12)(c) concerning 'diabetes mellitus', for minimal trauma fracture only;
  • new factor in subsection 9(12)(d) concerning 'human immunodeficiency virus', for minimal trauma fracture only;
  • new factor in subsection 9(12)(e) concerning 'glucocorticoid drugs', for minimal trauma fracture only;
  • new factor in subsection 9(12)(f) concerning 'rheumatoid arthritis', for minimal trauma fracture only;
  • new factor in subsection 9(12)(g) concerning 'an aromatase inhibitor', for minimal trauma fracture only;
  • new factor in subsection 9(12)(h) concerning 'a proton pump inhibitor', for minimal trauma fracture only;
  • new factor in subsection 9(12)(i) concerning 'hepatitis C virus', for minimal trauma fracture only;
  • new factor in subsection 9(18) concerning 'diabetes mellitus';
  • new factor in subsection 9(19) concerning 'human immunodeficiency virus';
  • new factor in subsection 9(20) concerning 'glucocorticoid drugs';
  • new factor in subsection 9(21) concerning 'rheumatoid arthritis';
  • new factor in subsection 9(22) concerning 'an aromatase inhibitor';
  • new definitions of 'alcohol', 'chronic infection with the hepatitis C virus', 'glucocorticoid drug as specified', 'minimal trauma fracture', 'MRCA', 'pack-years of cigarettes, or the equivalent thereof in other tobacco products', 'significant biomechanical abnormality' and 'VEA' in Schedule 1 - Dictionary; and
  • revising the definition of 'relevant service' in Schedule 1 – Dictionary.

Consultation

7.             Prior to determining this Instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to fracture in the Government Notices Gazette of 2 May 2012, 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

8.             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

9.             The determining of this Instrument finalises the investigation in relation to fracture as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 2 May 2012.

References

10.         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. 94 of 2015

Kind of Injury, Disease or Death: Fracture

 

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 fracture;
  • 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 as a minimum exist, before it can be said that a reasonable hypothesis has been raised, connecting fracture with the circumstances of eligible service rendered by a person, as set out in clause 4 of the Explanatory Notes;
  • replaces Instrument No. 53 of 2006; and
  • reflects developments in the available sound medical-scientific evidence concerning fracture 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. 94 of 2015, enacted under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, addresses the issue of determining the eligibility of veterans and service personnel for medical treatment and compensation in relation to fractures. This instrument replaces the previously revoked Statement of Principles concerning fracture, as it provides updated and comprehensive guidelines based on the latest sound medical-scientific evidence. The Authority determined this instrument to ensure that the factors associated with fractures are accurately assessed and linked to the service rendered by eligible individuals. The policy objective of this instrument is to facilitate claimants in making claims and the Repatriation Commission in assessing these claims, ensuring that the benefits are reasonable, proportionate, and transparent. The instrument was developed following an investigation notified in the Government Notices Gazette of 2 May 2012, and the Authority invited submissions from relevant organisations and experts. The instrument is compatible with human rights, as it promotes the right to social security, an adequate standard of living, and the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health for veterans, current and former Defence Force members, and their dependents. The instrument also facilitates the review of decisions by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Scope and Application

The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 94 of 2015, under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, establishes a Statement of Principles concerning fractures, replacing the previous Instrument No. 53 of 2006. This instrument applies to individuals who have rendered specific types of service, including operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, and British nuclear test defence service under the VEA, and warlike and non-warlike service under the MRCA. The new Statement of Principles sets out the minimum factors that must exist, relating to the service rendered, to establish a reasonable hypothesis connecting fractures or death from fractures with those service circumstances. The instrument facilitates both the making of claims and the assessment of those claims by the Repatriation Commission, as well as the review of such decisions by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The instrument's application is national, as it is determined under the Commonwealth legislation. There are no exclusions, exemptions, or thresholds specified within the text of the instrument itself, although application may be influenced by subordinate instruments or regulations.

Key Provisions

The main operative sections of this legislation are sections 3 to 9, which outline the purpose, operation, and scope of the Statement of Principles concerning fracture (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 94 of 2015). Section 3 establishes the purpose of the Statement of Principles, which is to be applied in determining claims under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). Section 4 describes the circumstances under which a reasonable hypothesis can be raised connecting fracture or death from fracture with particular kinds of service rendered by a person. Section 5 details the process of the Authority's investigation and determination of this Instrument, while section 6 lists the differences between the current and revoked Instruments. Sections 7 to 9 cover consultation, human rights compatibility, and the finalisation of the investigation respectively. This Act imposes obligations on the parties and entities it governs, primarily in relation to the assessment and determination of claims for medical treatment and compensation for fracture under the VEA and the MRCA. The Statement of Principles sets out the minimum factors that must exist for a reasonable hypothesis to be raised connecting fracture with service rendered by a person. The Repatriation Medical Authority is required to consider these factors when assessing claims, and the Repatriation Commission must apply the Statement of Principles when making decisions on claims. Furthermore, the Statement of Principles facilitates the review of such decisions by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Breach of the obligations imposed by this Act can lead to civil and criminal consequences. However, the Explanatory Notes do not explicitly state any specific offences, penalties, or consequences for non-compliance with the Act. The primary focus of this legislation appears to be on establishing clear criteria for assessing claims and ensuring compatibility with human rights, rather than imposing strict penalties for non-compliance. Nonetheless, any breaches of the provisions of the VEA and the MRCA, in general, may be subject to the penalties outlined in those Acts.

Legal classification tags

Area of Law
Veterans' Law
Health Law
Instrument
Statutory Instrument
Concepts
Definitions & Interpretation
Regulatory Standards
Reporting & Disclosure Obligations
Consultation Requirements

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.