Federal Court of Australia
CATCHWORDS
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Veterans' Entitlements Act s.36(a)(i) - whether service satisfied requirements for a service pension - whether danger incurred - meaning of the words in s.36(a)(i) - the nature of the test - the distinction between error of law and error of fact — relevance of endorsement stamped on
certificate of discharge.
Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) -— s.36(a)(i)
THE REPATRIATION COMMISSION v. WALTER HAROLD THOMPSON No. 6205 of 1980
Davies, Wilcox and Foster JJ. 24 June 1988 Sydney
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) )
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G205 of 1988 )
GENERAL DIVISION )
On appeal from a single judge of the Federa ourt of Australia
BETWEEN: THE REPATRIATION "COMMISSION Appellant AND: WALTER HAROLD THOMPSON Respondent CORAM: Davies, Wilcox and Foster JJ. DATE: 24 June 1986 PLACE: Sydney MINUTES OF ORDER THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be allowed. 2. The orders below be set aside and in lieu thereof,
there be substituted an order that the appeal to the Court be dismissed.
NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders jis dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY No. G205 of 1988
GENERAL DIVISION
On appeal from a single judge of the Federal Court of Australia
BETWEEN: THE REPATRIATION COMMISSION =—
Appellant AND: WALTER HAROLD THOMPSON Respondent CORAM: Davies, Wilcox and Foster JJ. DATE: 24 June 1988 PLACE: Sydney
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The Court: This is an appeal from the judgment of a single judge of this Court which held that an Administrative Appeals Tribunal ("the Tribunal") had erred in law in interpreting the provisions of s.36(a)(i) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth)("the Act") and in rejecting as of no weight an endorsement on the certificate of discharge of the present respondent, Walter Harold Thompson. The learned trial Judge set aside the decision of the Tribunal, remitted the matter to the Tribunal for.its reconsideration and ordered that the present appellant, the Repatriation Commission, pay the costs of the proceedings before
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate