Australia: Failure to convince the Tribunal sees second bite at the cherry pipped

Last Updated: 31 August 2017
Article by Andrew Gulyas and Nathan Hepple

Moore and Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission [2017] AATA 532

Key Points

  • The central issue was whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal should allow a case to be re-litigated in circumstances where there had previously been a consent decision issued.
  • The Tribunal determined that Mr Moore failed to provide sufficiently compelling reasons for the Tribunal to allow the case to be re-litigated.


Mr Moore was the victim of an assault at his home on 29 July 2002 while working with the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF). During the assault, Mr Moore suffered injuries to his face, particularly his jaw, and he claimed to have subsequently developed a psychiatric condition along with several other related conditions.

On 30 October 2003, Mr Moore lodged two claims for compensation under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (SRC Act). The first was in relation to an "adjustment disorder with depressed/anxious mood" and the second was in relation to a "right temporo-mandibular joint dysfunction".

These claims were both rejected by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission (MRCC) on 25 February 2005. This determination was affirmed by a reviewable decision dated 24 June 2005. Mr Moore sought the review of the 2005 reviewable decision and on 30 July 2008, a decision was issued by the AAT, with the consent of the parties, under section 42C of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) (AAT Act) which affirmed the 2005 reviewable decision.

In November 2012, the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce (DART) was established to assess and respond to individual cases of abuse in its varying forms within the Australian Defence Force. Mr Moore lodged a complaint to DART in 2013 and, after a review of this complaint, DART granted a reparation payment to Mr Moore.

Following his successful complaint to DART, Mr Moore lodged two further claims for compensation under the SRC Act in respect of "post-traumatic stress disorder" and his previously claimed jaw condition. In what the MRCC contends was an error, it revoked the determination dated 25 February 2005 and accepted Mr Moore's claims for compensation in a determination dated 5 March 2014. Mr Moore then lodged a further four claims for compensation in respect of "bruxism" secondary to PTSD (accepted on 5 May 2014), a "major depressive disorder" secondary to his PTSD and his jaw condition (accepted on 12 September 2014), "alcohol dependence" secondary to his claimed major depressive disorder (accepted on 12 September 2014), and "erectile dysfunction" secondary to his PTSD, jaw condition, major depressive disorder, and alcohol dependence (accepted on 12 March 2015).

The MRCC then issued reviewable decisions dated 13 May 2016 and 14 June 2016 revoking liability for all four of these previously accepted conditions. Mr Moore sought the review of these decisions on the basis that his claimed conditions were secondary to his accepted PTSD and jaw condition.

The MRCC sought to have Mr Moore's Applications dismissed on the grounds of section 33(1)(a) of the AAT Act.

The AAT was required to determine whether the new Applications were the same as those which had previously been litigated in 2008 and, if they were, whether there was reason for the Tribunal to further consider them anyway. The Tribunal noted that this question is considered one of the most uncertain aspects of its jurisdiction.

The Law

While there have been decisions to the effect that estoppel can serve as a basis for the Tribunal to dismiss an Application where it has been previously decided, the Tribunal was constrained in this case to only consider whether section 33 of the AAT Act, being a more informal power, could serve this purpose.

Section 33(1)(a) of the Act states that in a proceeding before the Tribunal, the procedure of the Tribunal is, subject to the AAT Act and the regulations and any other enactments, within the discretion of the Tribunal.

Section 62(1) of the SRC Act grants a determining authority the ability to, on its own motion, reconsider a determination made by it or by a delegated authority.

Mr Moore drew attention to the Tribunal decision in Re Matusko and Australian Postal Corporation [1995] AATA 14, where the Tribunal summarised the authorities regarding the re-litigation of issues, and submitted:

  • no formal issue estoppel arises from the Tribunal's previous findings;
  • he Tribunal should not generally allow re-litigation of issues already decided;
  • but, the Tribunal should use its flexible procedures to allow further consideration of issues where there is reason to do so, for instance where –
    • there is a different decision;
    • there is a clear legislative intent;
    • the reconsideration decision is not final;
    • there has been a change in circumstances or fresh evidence; or
    • where justice to the parties requires a departure from the general rule.

Mr Moore also drew attention to the Tribunal decision in Quinn and Australian Postal Corporation [1992] AATA 668, specifically the statement from this decision that,

"As it is clear from the statutory intention that the respondent can only reconsider a determination where there has been a change in circumstances, it seems justifiable to expect the respondent to be able to produce material in these proceedings supporting its assertion that the applicant is no longer entitled to compensation. There is no strict burden of proof as such but there must be additional evidence to indicate that there has been such a change in circumstances."

The Tribunal referenced the Full Court of the Federal Court decision in Telstra Corporation Limited v Hannaford [2006] FCAFC 87 as being relevant in the circumstances given that this decision had established that there was a clear legislative intent that decisions regarding compensation entitlements under the SRC Act were not to be final.


The Tribunal determined that Mr Moore failed to provide a sufficiently compelling reason for the Tribunal to allow his case to be re-litigated and dismissed his Applications pursuant to section 33(1)(a) of the AAT Act.

First, it was held that the MRCC, by virtue of section 62 of the SRC Act and the decision in Hannaford, had the capacity to correct decisions it felt to be erroneous, with these corrections not constituting a 'change in circumstances' or 'fresh evidence' requiring the matter to be reheard by the Tribunal.

Second, it was held that the DART decision did not constitute new or fresh evidence as this decision was made on the basis of plausibility, not a finding of fact, making it wholly inappropriate for the MRCC or the Tribunal to rely on the decision as evidence or proof in the making of its decisions.

Third, it was held that the other evidence Mr Moore sought to rely on did not constitute 'fresh evidence' such that his matter ought to be re-litigated given that this evidence had already been dealt with in previous proceedings.

Fourth, it was held that the passage of nearly 15 years since Mr Moore's assault meant that the MRCC would have been prejudiced by the difficulty and expense involved in collating all the relevant evidence necessary to re-litigate the matter, while no injustice was caused to Mr Moore in denying him the opportunity to present evidence he considered 'new' given that this evidence did not shed light on the issue of causation.

Lessons Learnt

This decision reinforced the Tribunal's general rule of not allowing the re-litigation of issues.

Where the issues raised in an Application regarding a new condition are substantively the same as those which have been previously litigated, and the claimed condition, although couched in new terminology, is substantively the same as a previously litigated condition and is borne out of the same incident, the Tribunal will follow the general rule regarding the re-litigation of issues.

To succeed in re-litigating a case, the applicant must prove that there is sufficient reason, such as a change in circumstances, fresh evidence, prejudice, etc. which would cause a departure from this rule.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Andrew Gulyas
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions