Jackman, Terence William v Repatriation Commission [1997] FCA 564

CATCHWORDS ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - appeal from decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal ("the AAT") that applicant not eligible for special rate of pension - whether AAT failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons - whether AAT decision based on finding that there was an intervening event or condition - whether decision so unreasonable that no reasonable decision maker could have so decided - whether AAT applied the correct standard of proof Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth), s 24(1)(c) Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), s 43(2B) Repatriation Commission v Smith (1987) 15 FCR 327, cited Banovich v Repatriation Commission (1986) 69 ALR 395, cited Cavell v Repatriation Commission (1988) 9 AAR 534, applied Malec v J C Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638, considered Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang (1996) 185 CLR 259, cited Repatriation Commission v Wilson (1996) 43 ALD 77, cited Repatriation Commission v Braund (1991) 23 ALD 591, cited Copperart Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (1993) 13 ATC 4779, cited Commissioner of Taxation v Osbourne (1990) 26 FCR 63, cited TERENCE WILLIAM JACKMAN - v - REPATRIATION COMMISSION No NG 521 of 1996 Tamberlin J Sydney 30 June 1997

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. NG 521 of 1996 ) GENERAL DIVISION )

BETWEEN: TERENCE WILLIAM JACKMAN Applicant AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION Respondent

CORAM: TAMBERLIN J PLACE: SYDNEY DATED: 30 JUNE 1997

MINUTE OF ORDERS The Court orders that the application be dismissed with costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. NG 521 of 1996 ) GENERAL DIVISION )