Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Sloan v Repatriation Commission [2012] FCA 1079 Citation: Sloan v Repatriation Commission [2012] FCA 1079
Appeal from: Sloan and Repatriation Commission [2011] AATA 424
Parties: RUPERT CHARLES SLOAN v REPATRIATION COMMISSION
File number: VID 784 of 2011
Judge: BROMBERG J
Date of judgment: 3 October 2012
Catchwords: DEFENCE AND WAR – defence service – veterans' entitlements – whether illness suffered by the applicant defence-caused – whether applicant's injury occurred 25 years before the "clinical onset" of illness – test for "clinical onset" – whether AAT failed to apply the accepted meaning of "clinical onset" – whether AAT disregarded evidence – whether AAT's approach to determining when "clinical onset" occurred was erroneous because it failed to determine for itself when symptoms or features of illness were in existence. Administrative Law – appeal of decision of the AAT – whether AAT's conclusions as to "clinical onset" compromised by error of law – no error of law – appeal denied.
Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 44 Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) ss 70(5)(a), 120(4), 120B
Cases cited: Lees v Repatriation Commission (2002) 125 FCR 331 Kaluza v Repatriation Commission [2010] FCA 1244 Kaluza v Repatriation Commission (2011) 122 ALD 448
Date of hearing: 2 April 2012
Place: Melbourne
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 24
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