Letts, Arthur v Director General of Social Security [1985] FCA 246

Letts, Arthur v Director General of Social Security [1985] FCA 246

The appeal is dismissed as the Tribunal was entitled to rely on evidence from the criminal trial, the Secretary was not bound by the absence of a restitution order at trial, and deduction from the pension does not constitute double punishment.

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 May 1985
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment Delivered
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['evidentiary Rules in Tribunals' 'restitution After Criminal Conviction' 'double Punishment']
['administrative Law' 'social Security Law'] ['evidentiary Rules in Tribunals' 'restitution After Criminal Conviction' 'double Punishment']

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal erred in relying on evidence from the criminal trial' 'Whether failure to seek restitution at the criminal trial precludes subsequent restitution by the Social Security Department' 'Whether deduction from pension after criminal punishment constitutes double penalty']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed as the Tribunal was entitled to rely on evidence from the criminal trial, the Secretary was not bound by the absence of a restitution order at trial, and deduction from the pension does not constitute double punishment.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.']