In
Berry v. Repatriation Commission it was held that the time that a veteran had been out of the work force was relevant to determining the reasons that prevented the veteran from continuing to undertake remunerative work. Gray J said:"Counsel for the applicant was concerned to suggest that the tribunal had erred in law by taking into account the fact that the applicant had been out of the work force for eighteen years. In my view it is plain that, as a matter of logic, the fact that an applicant for a special rate of pension under s.24 of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 has been out of the work force for a considerable period of time has relevance. The tribunal could not be criticised for making a finding of that fact or for taking it into account."
However, it must be recognised that merely because a person has been out of the work force for some period of time will not always be a relevant consideration. It depends on the nature of the remunerative work and whether or not, in that veteran's case, a lengthy time out of the work force would have contributed to preventing him or her from continuing to undertake remunerative work.
Time out of the workforce and time out of the relevant business field was also held to be relevant considerations in
Repatriation Commission v. Flentjar , Jackman v. Repatriation Commission, and Repatriation Commission v. Fox, W. H..