Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Rayson v Repatriation Commission [2012] FCA 648 Citation: Rayson v Repatriation Commission [2012] FCA 648
Appeal from: Rayson and Repatriation Commission [2011] AATA 233
Parties: RACHEL MARINA RAYSON v REPATRIATION COMMISSION
File number: VID 360 of 2011
Judge: BROMBERG J
Date of judgment: 21 June 2012
Catchwords: DEFENCE AND WAR – veterans' affairs – entitlement to pension – whether finding that veteran did not suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder erroneous – standard of proof – whether the standard of proof in s 120(1) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) applies to determination of whether veteran suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder– whether failure by Tribunal to identify all available hypotheses in determining whether incapacity was war-caused – appeal dismissed
Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 44 Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) ss 13(1)(b), 120(1), 120(3), 120(4), 120A
Cases cited: Repatriation Commission v Smith (1987) 15 FCR 327 Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82 Mines v Repatriation Commission (2004) 86 ALD 62 Benjamin v Repatriation Commission (2001) 70 ALD 622 Repatriation Commission v Budworth (2001) 116 FCR 200 Repatriation Commission v Cooke (1998) 90 FCR 307 Repatriation Commission v Warren (2008) 167 FCR 511
Date of hearing: 6 February 2012
Place: Melbourne
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