|
The RMA has noted several decisions that have considered Statements of Principles and may affect the execution
of its functions by the RMA under the Act.
In VVAA New South Wales Branch Inc V Repatriation Commission and Specialist Medical Review Council (7 June
2002), a decision of Justice Moore of the Federal Court, his Honour found that the SMRC had jurisdiction to continue
to review a Statement of Principles (MN of the prostate) which had been revoked by the RMA prior to the conclusion
of a review of the Statement of Principles by the SMRC. The parties named in this proceeding have filed an appeal
or cross appeal against the judgement.
In Kattenburg V Repatriation Commission (11 April 2002), Justice Emmett construed the phrase 'related to
service' as it appears in Statements of Principles by reading into it the language of subsection 14 of s.196B (which
is in the same terms). His Honour's decision concluded that it was not necessary for the factor to be wholly attributable
to service, but merely to have been contributed to in a material degree by the service, or that it would not have
occurred but for the rendering of the service.
This page last updated 16 October 2002.
|
