Repatriation Commission v Binding [1999] FCA 974

Repatriation Commission v Binding [1999] FCA 974

The Tribunal's impugned sentence, read in context and as part of the reasons as a whole, was a commentary on Mr Binding's oral evidence rather than a finding that the Statement of Principles requirement of intense fear, helplessness or horror was not met. The Tribunal was entitled to rely on the medical and psychological evidence supporting that requirement and to conclude that the hypothesis that Mr Binding's post traumatic stress disorder was war caused fitted the Statement of Principles template. No error of law was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Decision of the Veterans' Appeals Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal / Federal Court Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
["veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (cth)" 'post Traumatic Stress Disorder' 'war Caused Disease' 'statement of Principles' 'error of Law' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Reasons']
['administrative Law' "veterans' Affairs"] ["veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (cth)" 'post Traumatic Stress Disorder' 'war Caused Disease' 'statement of Principles' 'error of Law' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Reasons']

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 From Decision of the Veterans' Appeals Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal / Federal Court Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal committed an error of law in its approach to the definition of "experiencing a stressor" in the Statement of Principles concerning post traumatic stress disorder.' 'Whether the Tribunal\'s statement that Mr Binding\'s hypothesis did not contain evidence pointing to a response involving "intense fear, helplessness, or horror" was a finding that the Statement of Principles definition was not satisfied.' "Whether, read as a whole, the Tribunal's reasons supported its conclusion that the hypothesis that Mr Binding's post traumatic stress disorder was war caused fitted the Statement of Principles template."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's impugned sentence, read in context and as part of the reasons as a whole, was a commentary on Mr Binding's oral evidence rather than a finding that the Statement of Principles requirement of intense fear, helplessness or horror was not met. The Tribunal was entitled to rely on the medical and psychological evidence supporting that requirement and to conclude that the hypothesis that Mr Binding's post traumatic stress disorder was war caused fitted the Statement of Principles template. No error of law was shown.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal, including reserved costs, if any."]