A Vietnam veteran has been awarded more than $1.6 million, arguing he was repeatedly sexually and physically abused as a teenager in the navy.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
The man, now aged in his 70s and who cannot be named for legal reasons, took the Commonwealth of Australia to the ACT Supreme Court, seeking damages for personal injury arising from the historical assaults.
In 2024, the Commonwealth agreed, out of court, to settle the case "without admissions" with the man being awarded $1,675,000 in damages.
However, as part of the agreement, $500,000 of this money was set aside and held by the court until it was determined if the sum had already been paid to the man through his veteran disability pension.
The man enlisted as a junior recruit in the Royal Australian Navy in the late 1960s when he was 15 years old.
While at a training establishment at HMAS Leeuwin, he claimed he was repeatedly sexually and physically assaulted.
A year later, when posted to HMAS Sydney, the man stated he was subjected to bullying and further sexual assaults. This was said to have occurred again, when he was posted at HMAS Cerberus. He was under 18 during this time.
Separately, while in the navy the man performed periods of operational service, including serving in the Vietnam War at 17 years old.
As a result of disabilities caused by his operational service, he receives a pension from the Department of Veterans' Affairs. His pension was first granted in 1997 for hearing loss with tinnitus, caused by exposure to gun firings without adequate protection.
His pension was later increased in 2002 due to a related drug and alcohol problem, as well as anxiety.
The court case involved determining if the disability pension and the damages had been awarded in respect of the same incapacity. The court stated the purpose of this legal provision was to avoid duplication in compensation.
In January, Chief Justice McCallum found that there was no breakdown of damages included in the $1.6 million lump sum settlement which "frustrated" the legal act.
Therefore, she said it was not possible to identify the Commonwealth's liability and ordered the held money be paid to the man.