The decision to deny liability for an injury, or deny benefits where there is “no current entitlement” for an injury, disease or aggravation which has previously been accepted as compensable


Prior to Australian Postal Corporation v Oudyn [2003] FCA 318 such decisions where referred to as “Ceasing Effects”

[1] (go back)
, is an important decision which may have profound personal consequences for the individual member concerned. For this reason, MRCC staff must be particularly careful to get each adverse decision correct, both in law and in the decision-making process used.

MRCC staff must appreciate that a balance of interests are involved:

  • the Military Compensation Scheme must be administered in accordance with the relevant legislation
  • Defence Force members are entitled to receive the appropriate compensation benefits and rehabilitation services where they are injured as a result of their ADF service
  • MRCC clients are entitled to fair, courteous and timely service, delivered without favour or prejudice, and
  • MRCC staff have a responsibility to ensure that the integrity of the Scheme is preserved and that it is not adversely affected by fraud, overpayment or inappropriate decision-making.

Some of these considerations are discussed more fully below.