Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Wall v Repatriation Commission [2019] FCA 1838 File number: VID 828 of 2018
Judge: MORTIMER J
Date of judgment: 12 November 2019
Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – veteran's entitlements – whether Tribunal erred in finding material did not raise reasonable hypothesis – whether Tribunal misconceived its task or erred in application of s 120(3) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) – consideration of Tribunal reasons and whether Tribunal complied with duty in s 43(2B) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) – appeal dismissed
Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) ss 43(2B), 44 Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) ss 9, 120A, 120(3)
Cases cited: Bull v Repatriation Commission [2001] FCA 1832; 66 ALD 271 Bushell v Repatriation Commission [1992] HCA 47; 175 CLR 408 Byrnes v Repatriation Commission [1993] HCA 51; 177 CLR 564 Cameron v Repatriation Commission [2003] FCA 1323; 77 ALD 81 Forrester v Repatriation Commission [2013] FCA 898 Hardman v Repatriation Commission [2005] FCAFC 83 Horne v Repatriation Commission [1996] FCA 1866; 24 AAR 127 Levier v Repatriation Commission [1997] FCA 1365 Mulligan v National Disability Insurance Agency [2015] FCA 544; 233 FCR 201 Repatriation Commission v Deledio [1998] FCA 391; 83 FCR 82
Date of hearing: 17 May 2019
Registry: Victoria
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