Repatriation Commission v Allen F.H. [1995] FCA 734

CATCHWORDS VETERANS' AFFAIRS - application for increase in veteran's pension - reasonableness of explanation for failure to be ready to proceed to hearing - whether decision must be made on sole basis of written statement provided - legitimacy of consideration of additional evidence - necessity to afford opportunity to offer additional explanation - relevance of Veterans' Review Board's case management - reasonableness of veteran's explanation - application for review not abandoned Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) ss 155A(1)(c), 155AB(7), Maloney v Repatriation Commission [1993] 45 FCR 563 Re Danaher and Veterans' Review Board [1993] 18 AAR 28 REPATRIATION COMMISSION v FREDERICK HORACE ALLEN NG 664 OF 1994 EINFELD J SYDNEY 7 JUNE 1995

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. NG 664 of 1994 GENERAL DIVISION ) ON APPEAL FROM THE GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL Between: REPATRIATION COMMISSION Applicant And: FREDERICK HORACE ALLEN First Respondent THE PRINCIPAL MEMBER VETERANS' REVIEW BOARD Second Respondent MINUTE OF ORDERS 1. Appeal dismissed. 2. Applicant to pay respondents' costs of the appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders are dealt with in accordance with Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. EINFELD J SYDNEY 7 JUNE 1995

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. NG 664 of 1994 GENERAL DIVISION ) ON APPEAL FROM THE GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL Between: REPATRIATION COMMISSION Applicant And: FREDERICK HORACE ALLEN First Respondent THE PRINCIPAL MEMBER VETERANS' REVIEW BOARD Second Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT EINFELD J SYDNEY 7 JUNE 1995 An Australian war veteran, Frederick Horace Allen, was born on 5 December 1919, which means that he is now half-way through his seventy sixth year. On 17 December 1990 he applied for an increase in the veteran's pension which he had been receiving in respect of five disabilities dating back to and accepted as war-caused some time previously. The application for the increase was refused by the Repatriation Commission (the Commission) in March 1991 (the March 1991 decision) and the existing pension of 40 per cent of the general rate was continued. Mr Allen sought a review by the Veterans' Review Board (the Review Board) of that decision on 7 May 1991, but for various reasons that will become clear, that application has never come on for hearing.