Repatriation Commission v Gosewinckel [1999] FCA 1273

Repatriation Commission v Gosewinckel [1999] FCA 1273

The AAT erred in law by applying the wrong standard of proof to the disputed diagnosis of generalised anxiety disorder. Under Repatriation Commission v Cooke, which was binding, the diagnosis issue had to be determined to reasonable satisfaction under s 120(4) of the Veterans' Entitlement Act 1986 (Cth), not by applying the reasonable hypothesis or beyond reasonable doubt standards in ss 120(1) and 120(3). The matter therefore had to be set aside and remitted. In relation to causation, the AAT's hypothesis that clinical onset occurred within two years of a stressful event was not upheld by the Statement of Principles on the material as analysed, because the AAT treated some symptoms as...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 September 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S 44(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) / Appeal From Part of a Decision of the Veterans' Appeal Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Given on 29 October 1998
Outcome
Application allowed; AAT decision set aside and matter remitted; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['disability Pension' 'war Caused Disease' 'generalised Anxiety Disorder' 'standard of Proof' 'statement of Principles']
["veterans' Entitlements" 'administrative Law'] ['disability Pension' 'war Caused Disease' 'generalised Anxiety Disorder' 'standard of Proof' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under S 44(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) / Appeal From Part of a Decision of the Veterans' Appeal Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Given on 29 October 1998

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the AAT applied the wrong standard of proof in deciding whether the veteran was suffering from generalised anxiety disorder.' 'Whether the AAT misconstrued Statement of Principles No 48 of 1994 as amended by Instrument No 275 of 1995 by failing to consider whether the necessary indicia for generalised anxiety disorder were present.' "Whether, in deciding causation, the AAT failed to determine whether the hypothesis raised by the material was upheld by the Statement of Principles as required by s 120A(3) of the Veterans' Entitlement Act 1986 (Cth)."]

Ratio Decidendi

The AAT erred in law by applying the wrong standard of proof to the disputed diagnosis of generalised anxiety disorder. Under Repatriation Commission v Cooke, which was binding, the diagnosis issue had to be determined to reasonable satisfaction under s 120(4) of the Veterans' Entitlement Act 1986 (Cth), not by applying the reasonable hypothesis or beyond reasonable doubt standards in ss 120(1) and 120(3). The matter therefore had to be set aside and remitted. In relation to causation, the AAT's hypothesis that clinical onset occurred within two years of a stressful event was not upheld by the Statement of Principles on the material as analysed, because the AAT treated some symptoms as...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; AAT decision set aside and matter remitted; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ["The decision of the Veterans' Appeal Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal given on 29 October 1998 be set aside." "The matter be remitted to the Veterans' Appeal Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to be dealt with according to law." 'There be no order as to costs.']