Steele v Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Board [1955] HCA 34

92 C.L.R.] OF AUSTRALIA. 1i7

{HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.)

STEELE . 5 ' : i 4 : ' APPELLANT 3

AND

DEFENCE FORCES RETIREMENT BENE-\ p ; FITS BOARD AND ANOTHER . .f >

Constitutional law (Cth.)—Judicial power—Statute giving right of appeal from ¥. C. or A. decision of board to High Court constituted by single justice—Power of justice 1955. to state case for Full Court—Board exercising, inter alia, administrative discre- Ser tions —Reading down of right of appeal to include only decisions involving claims MELBOURNE, or controversies within judicial power—Board to be " satisfied" that percentage March 9; of incapacity of pensioner has altered. or that because of nature of his employment Jun it should be varied—Issue determinable under judicial power—Interpretation Dixon C.y., of statute—The Constitution (63 & 64 Vict. c. 12), s. 76 (ii.)—Defence Forces Willams, Retirement Benefits Act 1948-1952 (No. 31 of 1948—No. 93 of 1952), ss. 53 (1), puinea rend 83 (1)—Acts Interpretation Act 1901-1950 (No. 2 of 1901—No. 80 of 1950), s. 15a.

Section 83 (1) of the Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Act 1948-1952, which provides that any person aggrieved by a decision of the board set up under the Act may appeal to the High Court constituted by a single justice, is confined, by virtue of s. 154 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901-1950, to such decisions of the board as involve claims or controversies falling within the judicial power. So confined the section is a valid law of the Common- wealth. 'The section does not prevent a single justice stating a case for the decision of a Full Court.

Section 58 (1) of the Act which provides that " the Board may from time to time, if it is satisfied that the percentage of incapacity of a pensioner classified under section fifty-one of this Act has nature of his employment, should be varied, reclassify him in accordance with