Roper v Repatriation Commission [2008] FCA 1610

Roper v Repatriation Commission [2008] FCA 1610

No pure question of law arose from the Tribunal’s decision, as the Tribunal’s determination that Mr Roper’s two training flights outside Australia did not amount to 'continuous full-time service outside Australia' for operational service under s 6A(1) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act was open on the evidence and consistent with established legal principles; accordingly, the appeal was incompetent and had no merit.

Parties
Appellant: Coral Sylvia Roper; Respondent: Repatriation Commission
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Tribunal (aat) Decision / Federal Court Decision on Appeal Against Preliminary AAT Ruling
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Operational Service Definition, Standard of Proof, Jurisdictional Error, Pensions for Veterans' Dependants
Administrative Law Veterans' Law Operational Service Definition Standard of Proof Jurisdictional Error Pensions for Veterans' Dependants

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Coral Sylvia Roper

Appellant

Repatriation Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Tribunal (aat) Decision / Federal Court Decision on Appeal Against Preliminary AAT Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the AAT erred in finding Mr Roper did not render operational service under s 6A(1) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the findings of fact by the Tribunal involved a question of law justifying Federal Court intervention

Ratio Decidendi

No pure question of law arose from the Tribunal’s decision, as the Tribunal’s determination that Mr Roper’s two training flights outside Australia did not amount to 'continuous full-time service outside Australia' for operational service under s 6A(1) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act was open on the evidence and consistent with established legal principles; accordingly, the appeal was incompetent and had no merit.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed with costs.