Giesen v Repatriation Commission [2005] FCA 846

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Giesen v Repatriation Commission [2005] FCA 846 VETERANS' ENTITLEMENTS – pension – rate – whether special rate appropriate – test to be applied – whether 'alone' test or 'substantial cause' test – whether veteran who has engaged in remunerative work, but has ceased, can rely on latter test – whether ameliorating provision – whether tribunal took into account irrelevant considerations, asked itself correct question, dealt with correct issues, correctly applied statutory provisions and gave adequate reasons

Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) ss 24(1)(c), 24(2)(b), 13(1), 14, 15, 19, 22, 23, 119, 120 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 44(1)

Magill v Repatriation Commission [2002] FCA 744 cited Forbes v Repatriation Commission [2000] FCA 328 (2000) 101 FCR 50 cited Rendell v Repatriation Commission [2001] FCA 1881 cited Peacock v Repatriation Commission [2004] FCA 1449 cited Leane v Repatriation Commission [2004] FCAFC 83 cited Hendy v Repatriation Commission [2002] FCA 602 (2002) 72 ALD 112 cited Smith v Repatriation Commission (1987) 74 ALR 537 cited LEO GIESEN v REPATRIATION COMMISSION V 474 of 2004 GRAY J 24 JUNE 2005 MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 474 of 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

BETWEEN: LEO GIESEN

APPLICANT

AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: GRAY

DATE OF ORDER: 24 JUNE 2005

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY V 474 of 2004

ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL