Thompson v Repatriation Commission [2000] FCA 939

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Thompson v Repatriation Commission [2000] FCA 939

VETERANS' AFFAIRS – Appeal from decision of Veterans' Appeals Division of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Claim for service pension due to service related disease rejected by Repatriation Commission – Claim also rejected to Veterans Review Board – Statement of Principle issued after application for review filed with Tribunal but before determination of Tribunal – SoP ought not to have been applied by Tribunal – amending act was a repeal act – amending act affected a right – amending act did not contain an intention contrary to the presumption that accrued rights are to be preserved Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth), ss 119, 120, 120A, 196B Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), ss 8, 8A Veterans' Affais (1994-1995) Budget Measures Legislation Amendment Act 1994 (Cth) Ogston v Repatriation Commission (1999) 29 AAR 89, distinguished Repatriation Commission v Keeley [2000] FCA 532, applied Byrnes v Repatriation Commission (1993) 177 CLR 564, followed Esber v Commonwealth (1992) 174 CLR 430, followed Yao v Minister for Immigration (1996) 69 FCR 583, considered Director of Public Works v Ho Po Sang [1961] AC 901, considered

FRANK THOMPSON v REPATRIATION COMMISSION

NG 1167 of 1998

MADGWICK J

SYDNEY

19 JULY 2000

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 1167 of 1998

BETWEEN: FRANK THOMPSON

APPLICANT

AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: MADGWICK J

DATE OF ORDER: 19 JULY 2000

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application is allowed. 2. The decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal is set aside. 3. The matter is to be remitted to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for further consideration in accordance with the law. 4. The respondent is to pay the applicant's costs.