Statement of Principles concerning giant cell arteritis No. 71 of 2012

Administered by Department of Veterans' Affairs

Legislation au F2012L02082 Not in force Legislative Instrument

Legislation content

REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY

 

INSTRUMENT NO. 71 of 2012

 

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. 71 of 2001, determined under subsection 196B(2) of the VEA concerning giant cell arteritis.
  2. The Authority is of the view that there is sound medical-scientific evidence that indicates that giant cell arteritis and death from giant cell arteritis 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, Instrument No. 71 of 2012 concerning giant cell arteritis. 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 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 giant cell arteritis or death from giant cell arteritis, with the circumstances of that service.

5.             This Instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 30 June 2010 concerning giant cell arteritis 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;
  • deleting the ICD code from the Instrument header;
  • revising the definition of 'giant cell arteritis' in clause 3;
  • new factors 6(a) & 6(b) concerning 'smoking';
  • new definition of 'pack-years of cigarettes, or the equivalent thereof in other tobacco products' in clause 9;
  • revising the definitions of 'ICD-10-AM code' and 'relevant service' in clause 9; 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 giant cell arteritis in the Government Notices Gazette of 30 June 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.  No submissions were 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 giant cell arteritis as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 30 June 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. 71 of 2012

Kind of Injury, Disease or Death: Giant cell arteritis

 

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 giant cell arteritis;
  • 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 giant cell arteritis with the circumstances of eligible service rendered by a person, as set out in clause 4 of the Explanatory Notes;
  • replaces Instrument No. 71 of 2001; and
  • reflects developments in the available sound medical-scientific evidence concerning giant cell arteritis 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. 71 of 2012, concerning giant cell arteritis, was enacted under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). This legislative instrument was introduced to address the need for an updated and scientifically sound Statement of Principles regarding the relationship between giant cell arteritis and service rendered by veterans. The instrument replaces the previously revoked Instrument No. 71 of 2001, incorporating the latest medical-scientific evidence to facilitate claims for compensation under the VEA and MRCA. This update ensures that claimants and the Repatriation Commission have a clear, evidence-based framework to assess claims related to giant cell arteritis and other service-related conditions, thereby promoting the rights of veterans and their dependents to social security, adequate living standards, and access to healthcare.

Scope and Application

The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 71 of 2012, determined under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, focuses on facilitating claims for medical treatment and compensation for individuals diagnosed with giant cell arteritis, a condition linked to particular kinds of military service. This legislation applies to veterans, current and former Defence Force members, and their dependants who have contracted giant cell arteritis as a result of specific service conditions. The Instrument specifies the types of service—including operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, and British nuclear test defence service under the VEA, and warlike or non-warlike service under the MRCA—that must be linked to the onset of giant cell arteritis for a claim to be considered valid. The Instrument also outlines the necessary medical and service-related factors that must be established to support a reasonable hypothesis connecting the disease with the service rendered. The Instrument's scope is national, affecting claimants across Australia, and it reflects the latest medical-scientific evidence available. This legislative instrument improves the quality of medico-scientific outcomes under the VEA and the MRCA, while also ensuring compatibility with human rights by promoting rights to social security, adequate living standards, and the highest attainable standard of health.

Key Provisions

The Repatriation Medical Authority, under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, has revoked Instrument No. 71 of 2001 concerning giant cell arteritis and introduced Instrument No. 71 of 2012. This new Instrument sets out the Statement of Principles necessary to establish a connection between giant cell arteritis, or death from it, and specific types of service as defined in the Act (section 4). The kinds of service include operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, British nuclear test defence, warlike, and non-warlike service. This change is significant because it formalises the criteria required for a claim to be considered valid under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. The new Instrument imposes specific obligations on claimants and the Repatriation Commission. Claimants must provide evidence that meets the outlined factors to establish a link between their condition and their service. The Repatriation Commission, in turn, is required to assess these claims based on the Statement of Principles. The Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal also have roles in reviewing decisions made by the Repatriation Commission. The Instrument serves to guide these processes by specifying the necessary medical and service-related criteria that must be met. There are no specific offences or penalties mentioned within the Instrument itself. However, any failure to comply with the requirements set out in the Instrument could potentially lead to the rejection of a claim for compensation or medical treatment. This could have significant implications for claimants, as it would mean they would not receive the benefits they are entitled to under the Acts. The consequences of non-compliance, while not detailed in the Instrument, would typically involve legal processes to address the issues raised by the non-compliance, potentially leading to a review or reassessment of the claim. The Instrument ensures that it aligns with human rights standards as recognised in international instruments, such as the right to social security, the right to an adequate standard of living, and the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. It also facilitates the rights of persons with disabilities by ensuring that their claims for treatment and rehabilitation are properly assessed. By doing so, the Instrument not only meets legal requirements but also upholds the dignity and rights of affected individuals.

Legal classification tags

Area of Law
Veterans' Affairs
Instrument
Instrument
Concepts
Definitions & Interpretation
Regulatory Standards
Compliance Obligations
Reporting & Disclosure Obligations

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.