Statement of Principles concerning photocontact dermatitis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 82 of 2020)

Administered by Department of Veterans' Affairs

Legislation au F2020L01382 In force Legislative Instrument

Legislation content

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

 

STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES CONCERNING

PHOTOCONTACT DERMATITIS

(REASONABLE HYPOTHESIS) (NO. 82 OF 2020)

 

VETERANS' ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986

MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004

 

  1. This is the Explanatory Statement to the Statement of Principles concerning photocontact dermatitis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 82 of 2020).

Background

2.             The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority), under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA), repeals Instrument No. 108 of 2011 (Federal Register of Legislation No. F2011L01741) determined under subsection 196B(2) of the VEA concerning photocontact dermatitis.

3.             The Authority is of the view that there is sound medical-scientific evidence that indicates that photocontact dermatitis and death from photocontact dermatitis 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 photocontact dermatitis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 82 of 2020).  This Instrument will in effect replace the repealed Statement of Principles.

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

6.             This Instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 6 November 2018 concerning photocontact dermatitis 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.

7.             The contents of this Instrument are in similar terms as the repealed Instrument.  Comparing this Instrument and the repealed 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 the definition of 'photocontact dermatitis' in subsection 7(2);
  • revising the reference to 'ICD-10-AM code' in subsection 7(4);
  • revising the factors in subsections 9(1) and 9(3) concerning having the affected area of skin exposed to light in the presence of a phototoxic agent;
  • revising the factors in subsections 9(2) and 9(4) concerning having the affected area of skin exposed to light in the presence of a photoallergen;
  • deleting the factor concerning having cutaneous exposure to the photoallergen responsible for the photocontact dermatitis and to light, for allergic photocontact dermatitis only and for clinical onset only, as this has been subsumed into the factors in subsections 9(2) and 9(4) concerning having the affected area of skin exposed to light in the presence of a photoallergen;
  • new definitions of 'light', 'MRCA' and 'VEA' in Schedule 1 - Dictionary; and
  • revising the definitions of 'photoallergen', 'phototoxic agent' and 'relevant service' in Schedule 1 - Dictionary.

 

Consultation

8.             Prior to determining this Instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to photocontact dermatitis in the Government Notices Gazette of 6 November 2018, 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, the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation 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 in relation to 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 Instrument finalises the investigation in relation to photocontact dermatitis as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 6 November 2018.

References

11.         A list of references relating to the above condition is available on the Authority’s website at: www.rma.gov.au. Any other document referred to in this Statement of Principles is available on request to the Repatriation Medical Authority at the following address:

              

  Email:    info@rma.gov.au

  Post:      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. 82 of 2020

Kind of Injury, Disease or Death: Photocontact dermatitis

 

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(2) 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 connecting 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 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation 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 photocontact dermatitis;
  • 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 photocontact dermatitis with the circumstances of eligible service rendered by a person, as set out in clause 5 of the Explanatory Statement;
  • replaces Instrument No. 108 of 2011; and
  • reflects developments in the available sound medical-scientific evidence concerning photocontact dermatitis 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;
  • 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 photocontact dermatitis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 82 of 2020) was introduced to address the need for updated criteria for determining claims related to photocontact dermatitis under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). This legislation was enacted to provide a comprehensive framework that reflects the latest medical-scientific evidence regarding the condition, thereby ensuring that eligible veterans and Defence Force members can receive appropriate compensation and treatment. The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) determined this Statement of Principles in response to an investigation that examined the available sound medical-scientific evidence. The purpose of the Statement of Principles is to outline the minimum factors that must exist to establish a reasonable hypothesis connecting photocontact dermatitis with specific service circumstances, thus facilitating the assessment and review of claims by relevant authorities and commissions. The Authority ensured compatibility with human rights by confirming that this Legislative Instrument does not infringe upon any human rights and, in fact, promotes various rights of veterans, current and former Defence Force members, and their dependents. These include 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. By specifying the circumstances in which medical treatment and compensation can be extended to eligible persons, this legislation aims to ensure that these rights are exercised without discrimination. The Authority's determination of this Statement of Principles finalises the investigation that was initiated in accordance with the provisions of the VEA.

Scope and Application

The Statement of Principles concerning photocontact dermatitis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 82 of 2020) applies to individuals who have contracted photocontact dermatitis or suffered death from photocontact dermatitis and are seeking benefits under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 or the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. This includes veterans and current or former members of the Defence Force who have rendered operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, or British nuclear test defence service, as well as those who have undertaken warlike or non-warlike service. The principles are intended to facilitate the assessment of claims and the provision of benefits, compensation, and treatment. The principles are applicable nationally as they concern acts and legislation at the Commonwealth level. The Instrument is a replacement for Instrument No. 108 of 2011 and reflects updated medical-scientific evidence. There are no stated exclusions or exemptions, but the factors listed in the Statement must be met for a claim to be considered valid. The scope of the principles can be extended or restricted by subordinate instruments as necessary.

Key Provisions

The Statement of Principles concerning photocontact dermatitis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 82 of 2020) is a legislative instrument determined under subsection 196B(2) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA) (paragraphs 1, 4). It sets out the factors that must exist to raise a reasonable hypothesis connecting photocontact dermatitis or death from photocontact dermatitis with particular kinds of service rendered by a person (paragraph 5). These factors must be related to operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, British nuclear test defence, warlike, and non-warlike services (paragraph 5). The instrument aims to facilitate claimants in making, and the Repatriation Commission and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission in assessing, claims under the VEA and the MRCA (paragraph 2). The Statement of Principles replaces Instrument No. 108 of 2011 and reflects developments in the available sound medical-scientific evidence concerning photocontact dermatitis (paragraph 2). The obligations imposed on the parties governed by this Act include the requirement for claimants to demonstrate that the factors outlined in the Statement of Principles exist to raise a reasonable hypothesis connecting photocontact dermatitis with their service (paragraph 5). The Repatriation Commission and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission must assess claims based on the factors set out in the Statement of Principles (paragraph 2). The Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal must review decisions made by the Repatriation Commission and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, respectively (paragraph 2). There are no explicit offences, penalties, or consequences for breach mentioned in the Statement of Principles. However, failure to comply with the requirements of the Statement of Principles may result in the rejection of a claim for medical treatment and compensation under the VEA and the MRCA. The Statement of Principles is assessed as being a technical instrument which improves the medico-scientific quality of outcomes under the VEA and the MRCA (paragraph 3). It is also compatible with human rights, as it does not derogate from and promotes a number of human rights, including the right to social security, an adequate standard of living, and the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (paragraphs 4, 9).

Legal classification tags

Area of Law
Veterans' Law
Instrument
Explanatory Statement
Concepts
Definitions & Interpretation
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.