Johnson v Veterans' Review Board [2002] FCA 1543

Johnson v Veterans' Review Board [2002] FCA 1543

The application was dismissed because the notices issued under ss 155AA(4) and 155AB(4) were valid. The s 155AA(4) power was not lost by delay after expiry of the standard review period, because the statutory obligation depended also on the Principal Member or delegate forming the view that the applicant should be ready to proceed, and any obligation was continuing. The SA Registrar had valid delegated authority under the 21 July 1992 delegation, which continued notwithstanding the original Principal Member had ceased to hold office, and the notices were not invalid merely because they did not describe the Registrar as delegate. Consequently the Board's dismissal under s 155AB(5) was not...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Application Challenging Veterans' Review Board Dismissal and Related Review Processes Under Veterans' Entitlements Legislation / Final Judgment on Application
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
["veterans' Review Board Review Procedures" 'dismissal for Failure to Respond to Notice' 'delegation by Principal Member' 'timing of Statutory Notices' 'judicial Review Jurisdiction and Discretion']
["veterans' Affairs" 'administrative Law' 'statutory Interpretation'] ["veterans' Review Board Review Procedures" 'dismissal for Failure to Respond to Notice' 'delegation by Principal Member' 'timing of Statutory Notices' 'judicial Review Jurisdiction and Discretion']

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

Procedural Posture

Federal Court Application Challenging Veterans' Review Board Dismissal and Related Review Processes Under Veterans' Entitlements Legislation / Final Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether a notice under s 155AA(4) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) could validly be given nearly six months after expiry of the standard review period." 'Whether notices under ss 155AA(4) and 155AB(4) were invalid because they were signed by the SA Registrar without identifying that he acted as delegate of the Principal Member.' "Whether the 21 July 1992 delegation by the then Principal Member under s 166 of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) continued after that Principal Member ceased to hold office and a new Principal Member had not made a fresh delegation." 'Whether, assuming jurisdiction existed under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) or s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), relief should be granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the notices issued under ss 155AA(4) and 155AB(4) were valid. The s 155AA(4) power was not lost by delay after expiry of the standard review period, because the statutory obligation depended also on the Principal Member or delegate forming the view that the applicant should be ready to proceed, and any obligation was continuing. The SA Registrar had valid delegated authority under the 21 July 1992 delegation, which continued notwithstanding the original Principal Member had ceased to hold office, and the notices were not invalid merely because they did not describe the Registrar as delegate. Consequently the Board's dismissal under s 155AB(5) was not...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']