Hill v Repatriation Commission [2003] FCA 46

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Hill v Repatriation Commission [2003] FCA 46 DEFENCE AND WAR – appeal from decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – applicant's claim to have injury accepted as due to operational service – whether condition war-caused – threshold question whether whole of material before AAT raised a "reasonable hypothesis" connecting applicant's injury with circumstances of the particular service rendered – whether AAT identified the wrong issue and asked itself the wrong question

Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) s 9(1)(a) Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82 at 97 applied Craig v South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163 at 179 applied Dinon v Repatriation Commission (1999) 29 AAD 235 at 243 cited Repatriation Commission v Hill [2002] FCAFC 192 at [59] to [61] cited BARRY JOHN HILL v REPATRIATION COMMISSION NO T6 OF 2002 HEEREY J 7 FEBRUARY 2003 MELBOURNE (HEARD IN HOBART)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TASMANIA DISTRICT REGISTRY T6 OF 2002

BETWEEN: BARRY JOHN HILL

APPLICANT

AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: HEEREY J

DATE OF ORDER: 7 FEBRUARY 2003

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE (HEARD IN HOBART)

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal is allowed. 2. The decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal made on 17 May 2002 is set aside. 1. The application of the applicant be remitted for rehearing by the Tribunal differently constituted. 2. The respondent pay the applicant's costs, including reserved costs.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TASMANIA DISTRICT REGISTRY T6 OF 2002

BETWEEN: BARRY JOHN HILL

APPLICANT

AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: HEEREY J