Besson v Repatriation Commission [2014] FCA 881

Besson v Repatriation Commission [2014] FCA 881

The application for an extension of time should be dismissed because the applicant has not provided an acceptable explanation for the delay, the delay was substantial, and the prospects of success for the proposed appeal are poor. The Tribunal applied the correct legal test to assess if the event was a 'life-threatening event' as per the Statement of Principles and the applicant failed to demonstrate legal or factual error in the Tribunal’s approach.

Parties
Applicant: Peter Philip Besson; Respondent: Repatriation Commission
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Veterans' Pensions, Extension of Time, Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Standard of Proof, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Statement of Principles
Defence and War Administrative Law Veterans' Pensions Extension of Time Administrative Appeals Tribunal Standard of Proof Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Statement of Principles

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Philip Besson

Applicant

Repatriation Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an extension of time within which to file a notice of appeal should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal correctly applied the third step outlined in Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 83 FCR 82
  3. 3 Whether the applicant’s PTSD was war-caused as per the relevant Statement of Principles

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an extension of time should be dismissed because the applicant has not provided an acceptable explanation for the delay, the delay was substantial, and the prospects of success for the proposed appeal are poor. The Tribunal applied the correct legal test to assess if the event was a 'life-threatening event' as per the Statement of Principles and the applicant failed to demonstrate legal or factual error in the Tribunal’s approach.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application be dismissed.
  • The applicant pay the respondent's costs.