Repatriation Commission v Byrne, Kathleen Phyliss & Ors [1981] FCA 261

Repatriation Commission v Byrne, Kathleen Phyliss & Ors [1981] FCA 261

The Tribunal was entitled on the expert evidence to regard the suggested causal relationship between malaria or other tropical infections contracted during war service and the lymphosarcoma from which the ex-servicemen died as a real and distinct possibility, not merely fanciful. Because the matter was essentially one for the Tribunal as fact-finder, and because no tribunal properly directing itself was compelled to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the infections could not have caused the cancers, no error of law was shown. The Repatriation Act 1920 did not require the respondents first to prove causation on the balance of probabilities.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 1981
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S.44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 From Decisions of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Concerning Claims for War Widow's Pensions Under the Repatriation Act 1920 / Federal Court Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal; Appeals Dismissed
Outcome
Appeals dismissed with costs, including the costs of the notices of motion.
Legal Topics
["war Widow's Pensions" 'standard of Proof' 'causation' 'malaria and Tropical Infections' 'lymphosarcoma' 'appeals on Questions of Law From the Administrative Appeals Tribunal']
['administrative Law' "veterans' Entitlements" 'repatriation Law'] ["war Widow's Pensions" 'standard of Proof' 'causation' 'malaria and Tropical Infections' 'lymphosarcoma' 'appeals on Questions of Law From the Administrative Appeals Tribunal']

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

Appeal Under S.44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 From Decisions of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Concerning Claims for War Widow's Pensions Under the Repatriation Act 1920 / Federal Court Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal; Appeals Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal erred in law in holding that it was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that there were insufficient grounds for granting the respondents' claims for pensions." 'Whether, on the evidence, it was open to the Tribunal to treat the suggested causal relationship between malaria or other tropical infections contracted during war service and later lymphosarcoma as a real possibility rather than a fanciful possibility.' 'Whether the Repatriation Act 1920 required a claimant first to establish causal connection on the balance of probabilities before the statutory beyond reasonable doubt test applied.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled on the expert evidence to regard the suggested causal relationship between malaria or other tropical infections contracted during war service and the lymphosarcoma from which the ex-servicemen died as a real and distinct possibility, not merely fanciful. Because the matter was essentially one for the Tribunal as fact-finder, and because no tribunal properly directing itself was compelled to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the infections could not have caused the cancers, no error of law was shown. The Repatriation Act 1920 did not require the respondents first to prove causation on the balance of probabilities.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed with costs, including the costs of the notices of motion.

Orders

  • ['In W.A. No. G.16 of 1981, the appeal be dismissed with costs including the costs of the notice of motion herein.' 'In W.A. No. G.17 of 1981, the appeal be dismissed with costs including the costs of the notice of motion herein.' 'In W.A. No. G.18 of 1981, the appeal be dismissed with costs including the costs of...