Rickaby v Repatriation Commission [2001] FCA 971

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Rickaby v Repatriation Commission [2001] FCA 971

DEFENCE AND WAR – veteran's entitlements – error of law whether Tribunal failed to apply the correct statutory test – whether Tribunal omitted to appraise testimony of veteran and of expert medical practitioners upon the basis of supporting reasonable hypothesis in conformity with applicable Statements of Principle issued by the Repatriation Medical Authority – whether Tribunal in substance and reality erred by determining instead whether it was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the veteran sustained the injuries the subject of the hypothesis which he had advance.

Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) ss 5B(1), 6C(1), 7(1)(a), 9(1), 120(1), 120(3), 120A(3), 196B(2) Arnott v Repatriation Commission [2001] FCA 262 referred to Bushell v Repatriation Commission (1992) 175 CLR 408 applied Byrnes v Repatriation Commission (1993) 177 CLR 564 applied Deledio v Repatriation Commission (1997) 47 ALD 261 applied Dixon v Repatriation Commission (1999) 29 AAR 235 applied Lowerson v Repatriation Commission (1994) 50 FCR 252 referred to Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82 applied Repatriation Commission v Keeley (2000) 98 FCR 108 referred to Repatriation Commission v Stares (1996) 41 ALD 212 referred to BRIAN RICKABY v REPATRIATION COMMISSION JUDGE: CONTI J DATE: 25 JULY 2001 PLACE: SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N1359 OF 2001

BETWEEN: BRIAN RICKABY

APPELLANT

AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: CONTI J

DATE OF ORDER: 25 JULY 2001

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal against the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal made on 28 November 2000, in so far as the same relates to the Appellant's claim in relation to cervical spondylosis, be upheld. 2. The appeal against the above decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, in so far as the same relates to the Appellant's claim in relation to lumbar spondylosis, be dismissed. 3. The proceedings be remitted to Administrative Appeals Tribunal for determination according to law. 4. The Respondent to pay the Appellant's costs of the appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.