Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Constable v Repatriation Commission [2005] FCA 928
VETERANS' ENTITLEMENTS – statement of principles – applicant claims alcohol abuse/dependence is a war-caused disease –applicant claims to have experienced a severe stressor of casualty clearance whilst in operational service ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL – review of decision – question of law – whether the material points to a hypothesis that fits the relevant template in the applicable statement of principles
WORDS AND PHRASES – 'might evoke intense fear, helplessness or horror', 'severe stressor', 'reasonable hypothesis connecting', 'war-related', 'war caused disease', 'witnessing casualty clearance'
Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) ss 120, 120A, 196B
Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82 followed Dixon v Repatriation Commission (1999) 29 AAR 235 followed Repatriation Commission v Hill (2003) 69 ALD 581 referred to White v Repatriation Commission (2004) 39 AAR 67 distinguished Stoddart v Repatriation Commission (2004) 74 ALD 366 considered Repatriation Commission v Stoddart (2004) 77 ALD 67 referred to Woodward v Repatriation Commission (2004) 75 ALD 420 considered
The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, (ed) L Braun, Claredon Press, Oxford (1993) ROBERT PATRICK CONSTABLE v REPATRIATION COMMISSION QUD 240 OF 2004 DOWSETT J 8 JULY 2005 BRISBANE (HEARD IN TOWNSVILLE)
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY Q 240 OF 2004
ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
BETWEEN: ROBERT PATRICK CONSTABLE
APPLICANT
AND: REPATRIATION COMMISSION
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: DOWSETT J
DATE OF ORDER: 8 JULY 2005
WHERE MADE: BRISBANE (HEARD IN TOWNSVILLE)
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal dated 4 November 2004 be set aside; 2. The matter be remitted to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for further consideration in accordance with law; 3. The respondent pay the applicant's costs of the proceedings. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate