House v Defence Force Retirement & Death Benefit [1998] FCA 1800

House v Defence Force Retirement & Death Benefit [1998] FCA 1800

No error of law was demonstrated in the Purcell Tribunal's determination that the applicant should remain at 40 per cent incapacity (class B). The findings of fact were supported by the evidence, and did not give rise to a question of law.

Parties
Applicant: David Richard House; Respondent: Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefit Authority
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 March 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Invalidity Classification, Assessment of Incapacity, Review of Tribunal Decision
Administrative Law Invalidity Classification Assessment of Incapacity Review of Tribunal Decision

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Richard House

Applicant

Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefit Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Purcell Tribunal erred in law in refusing to alter applicant's classification from class B (40%) to class A (60%)
  2. 2 Whether findings of fact by Purcell Tribunal give rise to a question of law
  3. 3 Adequacy of reasons given by Purcell Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

No error of law was demonstrated in the Purcell Tribunal's determination that the applicant should remain at 40 per cent incapacity (class B). The findings of fact were supported by the evidence, and did not give rise to a question of law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Applicant is to pay the respondent's costs of the application.