COURT IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION FOSTER J HRNG SYDNEY, 23, 25-27, 30 November 1992; 1-4, 7-11, 14-17 December 1992; 25, 26, 30, 31 March 1993; 1, 14-16, 19, 20, 23 April 1993; 13-15 October 1993 #DATE 18:5:1994 Counsel for the Applicant: Ms C. Simpson QC with Mr R. Wilkins Instructed By: Maurice May and Co Counsel for the Respondent: Mr J. Mccarthy QC with Mr P. Jones Instructed By: Australian Government Solicitor ORDER THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. the application be dismissed. 2. costs be reserved. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. JUDGE1 FOSTER J These proceedings were commenced in the High Court of Australia and were transferred to this Court for hearing. The statement of claim is expressed in very wide terms. The case presented was considerably narrower. The statement of claim alleges that the applicant, Wesley Thomas Dingwall ("Dingwall"), whilst serving in the Australian Army during the "Antler" series of atomic tests at Maralinga, South Australia, in 1957, was exposed to nuclear radiation in circumstances which involved breaches of common law and statutory duties owed to him by the respondent, the Commonwealth of Australia. It was alleged that Dingwall suffered injuries being: (a) anxiety and (b) basal cell carcinomas. 2. In his Schedule of Damages filed in this Court the list of injuries was expanded to allege:- "(a) Radiation burns (b) Consequent radiation sickness (c) Severe anxiety/depressive state (d) Consequent aggravation of the applicant's asthma (e) Anaemia (f) Heart attack which is alleged to be aggravated by anxiety (g) A stroke which is alleged to be aggravated in the same way (h) Brain damage." 3. Dingwall also relied upon the following list of continuing disabilities:- "(a) The applicant has suffered at various stages from episodes of irrational behaviour, extreme tearfulness and suicidal thoughts (b) Loss of appetite (c) Loss of libido (d) Excessive drinking (e) Recurrent tremors of the hands (f) Extreme feelings of anxiety in apparently normal situations (g) Sweating (h) Dry throat (i) Aggressiveness in general (j) The applicant at various periods has fought with his wife generally over petty things (k) Extreme morbidity and feeling that things were against him (l) Recurrent insomnia (m) Occasional nightmares (n) Various episodes of irrationality bordering on violence (o) Feelings of paranoia (p) Recurrent episodes of breathlessness (q) The applicant is likely to get asthma during or after undertaking any strenuous physical activity (r) Difficulty in breathing." 4. In addition, claims were made for economic loss, loss of earning capacity and out-of-pocket expenses. 5. When the matter came to hearing, it was indicated by counsel that Dingwall no longer relied upon any allegation of injurious exposure to nuclear radiation and consequent physical harm. Physical damage was not alleged except insofar as physical conditions suffered by Dingwall, in particular asthma, had been aggravated from time to time by anxiety. It was also alleged, by way of later amendment, that Dingwall had suffered some brain damage by reason of excessive indulgence in alcohol which was, itself, causally related to his anxiety. 6. It was made clear that the case to be presented on behalf of Dingwall was based upon the negligent infliction upon him of psychiatric injury in breach of the duty of care owed to him by the respondent as a result of his employment by the respondent at Maralinga. Indeed, his claim was put, in final written submissions on his behalf, in the following succinct and colloquial terms:- "You sent me to Maralinga, you frightened the living daylights out of me, and caused a psychiatric disorder." 7. There was no dispute that Dingwall, at the time of the institution of the proceedings and thereafter, did in fact suffer from a psychiatric illness. There was a significant contest as to the nature of that illness and as to its aetiology. There was also no dispute that the respondent had owed to Dingwall the employer's duty to take all reasonable steps to save Dingwall from risks of injury which reasonable foresight would discern and reasonable prudence would obviate. Only the breach was denied. The Issues 8. Despite deficiencies in the pleadings the case was quite clearly fought on the following issues: whether Dingwall's psychiatric illness or disorder was caused by his activities and experiences at Maralinga during his employment in the Army in the "Antler" series of tests; if so, whether the risk of such injury was reasonably foreseeable by the respondent at the time; if so, did the respondent fail to take steps to prevent injury which were reasonable and available at the time; and, finally, were Dingwall's psychiatric injuries, if suffered at Maralinga, occasioned by the infliction upon him of "nervous shock". Factual Background and Evidence 9. As the relevant injuries were alleged to have been inflicted in late 1957 and to have resulted in disabilities of fluctuating intensity up to the time of hearing and into the future, the evidence, of necessity, covered a span of 35 years of Dingwall's life. Dingwall was discharged from the Army, medically unfit, in 1968, having enlisted in 1955. Accordingly, not inconsiderable reference was made to his Army records. 10. Upon leaving the Army he became eligible for benefits under the Defence Forces Retirement and Death Benefits Scheme ("DFRDB") on medical grounds. He was the subject of medical examinations at the time and with some regularity thereafter. The reports in relation to these examinations were put into evidence at the hearing. Similarly, medical reports in relation to a subsequent application for an invalid pension have been placed before me as part of the evidence in the case. Furthermore, medical reports in relation to a previous application by Dingwall for an award of Commonwealth compensation have become evidence in the case. 11. In addition to these materials, reports have been tendered and evidence given by medical practitioners who have examined and treated Dingwall during his Army service and thereafter, including reports and evidence from a psychiatrist who has been treating him since 1984. In addition, each side has required Dingwall to submit to medico-legal examinations by psychiatrists and psychologists who have expressed conflicting views as to the nature of Dingwall's psychiatric condition and its likely cause. The opinions of these practitioners were the subject of lengthy exposition and detailed investigation in Court. Broadly speaking, the range of opinion extended from diagnoses that Dingwall was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder ("PTSD") (the most favourable for his case) to Anxiety Disorders of one kind or another (less favourable) to Personality Disorder (unfavourable). 12. In addition to scientific evidence directed to diagnosis, there was considerable evidence bearing upon the foreseeability in 1957 of psychiatric harm to persons performing duties such as those performed by Dingwall at Maralinga. This evidence was supported by the tender of a very large number of articles and studies published in scientific journals. Similar documentary material was tendered in relation to evaluations of the diagnostic category of PTSD and as to the nature and validity of certain psychometric tests which have been applied to Dingwall in the investigation of his psychiatric condition. This literature was also extensive. 13. The hearing of the case occupied 32 days and was, unfortunately, of necessity, split into several hearing periods over a number of months. The case was very fully argued on both sides. Although, at the conclusion of addresses, I had formed some fairly clear impressions, it has been necessary to re-read the whole of the transcript and all the exhibits before arriving at a final conclusion. This conclusion was necessarily based, to a not inconsiderable extent, upon views I had formed from listening to and observing witnesses in the giving of their oral testimony. In particular, as so much of the medical opinion of the case has been based upon history given by Dingwall, it has been necessary to very carefully consider his reliability and credibility. 14. Before I come to consider the issues in the case, I think it desirable to set out by way of background, in chronological sequence, material which does not appear to be in dispute, some factual findings on some disputed matters, and some comments on the evidence. 15. Dingwall was born on 11 September 1932. He had an elder brother and younger sister. His family life appears to have been happy and stable. The family moved to the Sydney suburb of Gymea when he was a child. Thereafter he attended Hurstville Technical High School, leaving at age 15, having achieved the Intermediate Certificate. He was a fairly poor scholar but was proficient at sport. He appears to have been popular with his peer group. He received an encouraging reference from his school teacher upon leaving school and also, subsequently, from an employer. 16. After leaving school he was apprenticed to a brick-layer but did not complete his apprenticeship. Whilst so employed, he married his wife Margaret Ellen. The marriage has subsisted. At the time of the marriage she was 19 years of age and Dingwall was in his 18th year. After marriage the couple resided with Mrs Dingwall's parents at an address in Sylvania which was in the same street as the home of Dingwall's parents. 17. It appears that Dingwall abandoned his apprenticeship after marriage for financial reasons and thereafter took up a number of occupations which provided a better income. Although the evidence is fairly sparse on the subject, it would appear that none of them provided secure long-term prospects. This was obviously important as the Dingwalls, between November 1950 and December 1955, had four children, a son, a daughter, a son and another daughter. 18. It is clear that Dingwall and his wife, in those circumstances, would have been desirous of Dingwall's obtaining secure employment. Although he has no recollection of it, it appears that he made an application to join the Army as an officer cadet in September of 1953. This application was not successful. Intelligence and aptitude tests were administered to him by Army psychologists. His scores on these tests indicated that he "did not meet the required intellectual standard for entry into OCS". Other details recorded at the time indicated that he gave as his reason for wishing to enter the Army that it provided security. Although, later, in psychiatric reports obtained by the respondent, adverse comment was made upon this motivation, I can see nothing remarkable in it. He was 21 years of age. He was living with his wife's parents. His third child had just been born. Since leaving school he had had a number of fairly unsatisfactory occupations. His increasing family obligations would have inevitably driven him towards the obtaining of secure employment. The Army records described him as being "reasonably stable and mature" and also as being "co-operative". 19. On 31 October 1955 Dingwall made a second application to join the Army, this time for general entry. This application was successful. He received psychometric testing appropriate to this level of entry. The tests, again, appear to have been designed to measure intelligence and aptitudes. In these respects he satisfied the requirements for general entry into the Army, the results indicating that he would be suitable for work in "canteens". The Army record card described him as being tall and well-built, friendly and co-operative and appearing to be stable and mature with some drive and initiative. It was further remarked that he "should settle down well in the Army" and was "possible NCO potential". It was further recorded that he did not drink, that he smoked, and had no interests outside home and family. It was also noted that his reason for seeking enlistment was "security". In this regard, it may be noted that his fourth child was born on 10 December 1955, approximately one month after his enlistment. 20. In view of the fact that Dingwall has been diagnosed by psychiatrists and a psychologist called on behalf of the respondent as suffering from a personality disorder of genetic and early environmental origin, it is appropriate to note, at this point of these reasons, that the only evidence in the case bearing upon his mental and emotional make-up at the time of his enlistment gives no indication that any such disorder was then manifest. He describes himself as then being of a happy disposition, and as getting on well with his family and peers. He says that he had had a happy childhood and was brought up in a friendly, stable home environment by highly responsible and caring parents. He enjoyed and was successful in outdoor sports and had an emotionally healthy life. His wife, who had known him and his family as neighbours for a number of years, corroborated this. When asked about his personality she said "cheerful, happy. He was very bright. Certainly not a worrier of any type". 21. Mrs Dingwall also corroborated her husband's statement in the Army records that he did not drink. She expressed the view that there was insufficient money to enable him to buy beer or spirits. I do not understand, however, that either he or she contends that prior to enlistment he was a teetotaller. There is reference in the evidence, which I accept, to his having the occasional bottle of beer at this point of time. No doubt, within the severe financial limits that his family responsibilities imposed upon him, he had at least an occasional drink with co-workers after knocking off for the day. I note that his diverse occupations included heavy outdoor activities such as concreting, brick laying and tie cutting. As he later became, undeniably, a problem drinker, it is worth recording at this point my satisfaction that, prior to his enlistment, he was not averse to liquor. Clearly enough, however, it did not constitute a problem for himself or his family. Again, his wife described him in his pre-enlistment and early Army days as being a good father and family man. She said "he truly did love his children and he was a good husband. He provided and he did everything he could to make sure we had everything we needed...he was very stable at that time. He was a happy personality". 22. In evaluating this type of comment one must bear in mind that it is made by a wife of a husband and also with the benefit of the mellowing influence that the passage of time imposes on recollection. Mrs Dingwall, however, impressed me as a sensible balanced person whose evidence could be accepted with reasonable confidence. I accept, as part of the background in this case, that Dingwall, at the time he entered the Army, appeared to be a stable young man accepting and discharging family responsibilities which were certainly greater than normal for his age. His intellectual attainment and aptitudes were modest but he had a willingness to work and no evident personality problems. 23. After enlistment, Dingwall performed six months basic Army training at Kapooka Army Camp at Wagga Wagga, New South Wales. During this period Dingwall suffered some ill-health. His medical record shows regular attacks of tonsillitis which resulted in his undergoing tonsillectomy in February 1956. Also, in January 1956 he was admitted to Seven Camp Hospital for observation as he had been vomiting dark blood and passing dark blood in his stools. These conditions, known as haemetemisis and malaena, have been referred to in subsequent medical reports as indicating that he may have been over-indulging in alcohol. Dingwall admitted to Dr Barclay, a psychiatrist who gave evidence in his case, that "he had been drinking more than his normal amount from the time he joined the Army". It is to be noted, moreover, that in March 1956 he was arrested by local police as a result of an incident in the town which appears likely to have been alcohol related. In his evidence, Dingwall appeared to remember the incident and treated it lightly. It was probably not a matter of much importance, but I gain the impression from it and the other matters to which I have just made reference, that, once Dingwall was relieved of what must have been a fairly restrictive home environment and was also in receipt of more regular income, he increased his drinking considerably beyond the level of mere weekend indulgence. No clear picture, however, emerges. 24. It may be noted that the medical record indicates that he suffered from epistaxis, nose bleeds. Reference to this condition appears with some regularity in his medical reports. It appears to have been a fairly constant problem for him and could have some bearing upon the conditions referred to above. In his evidence he made some reference to fighting with fellow soldiers. He had, in the past, taken part in rugby football and in boxing. It is difficult to see much significance in occasional outbursts of aggressive behaviour in a young soldier in an Army camp. However, these matters need to be taken into account along with the descriptions given of him in the family circle, when seeking to form a picture of him in the early years. 25. After completing his initial training and a short period on general duties he was posted to the Army Canteen Service attached to Eastern Command in New South Wales. He performed duties in the mess at Victoria Barracks. In November 1956, according to his medical records, he was admitted to Rehabilitation General Hospital at Concord with a suspected duodenal ulcer. He had been vomiting blood and gave a history of epigastric pain suffered over a period of seven months. His condition was investigated by way of a barium meal x-ray. He gave evidence that no ulcer was detected. His original recollection of the matter, given in evidence, was that the admission took place after his tour of duty at Maralinga. This recollection was incorrect. The incident is of some significance in that it indicates that he was suffering these particular symptoms before Maralinga and that he had come, with the passage of time, to attribute, incorrectly, the problems he had in this area to experiences during that tour of duty. Moreover, according to medical evidence in the case, these symptoms could well result from over-indulgence in alcohol. 26. Another sick report in his medical records indicates that Dingwall received a wound to his left eyebrow in an alcohol-related incident. He remembered it when giving evidence. He said that he was struck over the eye with a bottle thrown by another soldier. It was, however, an accident and not the result of a fight. The matter, again, is probably not of great significance but it does indicate the possibility that alcohol was playing a part in his day-to-day life. 27. In July 1957 he was sent to Marrickville Army Depot as a kitchen hand awaiting a new posting. He was informed by the Warrant Officer in charge of him that he was to be posted to Maralinga to perform canteen duties. He was aware that atomic bomb tests were being conducted there and had picked up some information about the place from personnel who had come back from tours of duty. He had also received some instruction, as part of his general training, in relation to atom bombs and atomic warfare. He knew of the dangers of radiation. The evidence does not make clear the nature of the instruction he received but it would appear that it consisted of some four lecture sessions given as part of his basic infantry training. 28. I am satisfied that he was not happy at the prospect of going to Maralinga but accepted that it was an order that he must obey. 29. It appears that, in giving accounts to examining medical practitioners many years later, he provided an explanation of his being posted to Maralinga. He said that he was sent to the area as a form of punishment. There had been some difficulties in relation to mess finances and he had been wrongly accused of being involved in some dishonesty. He gave no evidence of this in Court. The fact that he gave such a version on another occasion is just one of the many perplexing features of this case. 30. His evidence satisfies me that he did not go to Maralinga as part of a group. He travelled on his own, mainly by train, to the railway station in the Nullarbor Plains, which was the stopping place for travel to the Maralinga test area. This station and an associated small settlement was called "Watson". From Watson he was transported to the Maralinga village where he was accommodated overnight. This village has been fully described in the evidence. It was a fairly significant settlement in which were housed personnel who were playing a role in the conduct of the British atomic tests together with supporting staff, civilian and service. It also had fairly substantial social, recreational, and sporting facilities. It was not intended that Dingwall perform any duties in the Maralinga village. He was to work as a mess attendant at a subsidiary settlement closer to the atomic testing range. This settlement, which consisted mainly of tents, was called "Roadside". It was about 20 miles north of Maralinga village. A sealed road connected the two establishments. North of Roadside was what was described as the "forward area". In this area were set up the various sites at which atomic devices were detonated. Another sealed road proceeded from the Roadside village to the various explosion sites. Roadside was approximately nine miles from the site where atomic explosions occurred during the period that Dingwall was stationed at Maralinga. These explosions were referred to as the Antler series and were three in number, code-named in chronological order: "Tadje", "Biak", and "Taranaki". 31. Roadside was used as an establishment to provide facilities for personnel involved in the setting up of the test sites, the assembling of the weapons and their detonation. Messing and other facilities were provided. It appears that about 100 persons were accommodated at Roadside from time to time during the test period. There was a boom gate established across the road leading north from Roadside. Entrance into the area forward of the boom gate was permitted only to authorised personnel and vehicles. The terrain off either side of the sealed road was rough. It was desert country. 32. Dingwall was transported from Maralinga village to Roadside the morning after his arrival. He was picked up by Corporal Henley who was his immediate superior. On arrival at Roadside he joined a catering team, consisting of two cooks and a few stewards whose job it was to provide meals in the mess and also to take meals, morning tea and the like, to forward areas where work was being conducted. 33. I am satisfied that Dingwall was not given any specific information or instruction as to what was going on at Maralinga. He knew, of course, that testing of nuclear weapons had been taking place in the area and in other areas in Australia since 1952. This was common knowledge at the time. Apart from what he had received by way of general instruction on atomic weapons and radiation, he was also aware from press reports and general information of the dropping of the atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagisaki and of the short and long term effects of the explosions. There is no evidence that personnel performing the tasks assigned to Dingwall and his colleagues were given any further instruction as to nuclear matters than had been given to Dingwall. I am not satisfied that he missed out on any specific instruction as a result of his being sent on his own to the Maralinga area. At Maralinga village he was, however, issued with an item of equipment described as a film badge. He was told that he was required to wear it at all times. He was given to understand by the person issuing it that it was a device to record exposure to radiation. This was in fact true. With some hesitation, I also accept that Dingwall was told that if the badge changed colour this was indicative of his having been exposed to a significant degree of radiation. This was an inaccurate statement. Exposure to radiation registered not on the outer surface of the badge but upon film contained within it. Exposure could be measured only by the development of the film under scientific control. 34. At Maralinga village he was also required to sign a document described as an "Undertaking of Secrecy" form. The form is in evidence and contains a number of references to the sections of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth). Clearly enough Dingwall would not have read or understood these. I am satisfied that he received a warning which he understood to mean that he could not divulge to anyone details of what he observed in relation to the tests. Dingwall was a private soldier and I have little doubt that, in the circumstances of 1957, this admonition was given to him forcefully and that he was threatened with dire penalties should he commit any secrecy breach. 35. I shall return to the matter of the secrecy undertaking later in these reasons. I note at this stage that it is difficult to determine with any precision what effect this requirement actually had on Dingwall in the months and years to come. He says, in parts of his evidence, that he understood that he could not, on pain of condign punishment, describe to anyone anything that he had observed at Maralinga for the space of 30 years. However, it is clear that he did, in fact, tell his wife of a number of matters shortly after his return from Maralinga. Also, at various times, he alleges he told doctors of his experiences and their effect upon him, whilst, at other times, he avers that he refrained from telling doctors about his problems because of the constraints of the secrecy undertaking. I have found this part of his evidence quite unsatisfactory, although I am satisfied that he signed the document and received the warning. 36. Other atomic tests had been conducted previously in the Maralinga area. Those which had been held closest to the sites of the Antler series were known compendiously as "Operation Buffalo". Four detonations had taken place in this series, the first on 27 September 1956, the second on 4 October, the third on 11 October and the fourth on 22 October. These explosions were code-named in order "One Tree", Marcoo", "Kite" and "Breakaway". The evidence establishes that the sites of these explosions, known scientifically as "ground zeros", were still visible in the area and could be reached by road from the Roadside village. 37. The Antler series of tests took place approximately one year later, Tadje on 14 September 1957, Biak on 25 September 1957 and Taranaki on 9 October 1957. Dingwall was present at all three tests. The first two were "tower" tests, the nuclear device being exploded from a position on a tower frame erected in the desert. The third was a "balloon burst", the device being suspended from balloons in the air. The first two explosions were of the order of one kiloton, meaning that the explosive force was equivalent to one thousand tons of TNT. The final explosion was a 25 kiloton explosion. This was an explosion of greater dimension than had been produced by the atomic bomb at Hiroshima. 38. Adjacent to the Roadside village there was a small rise in the ground which was known as Observation Hill. This was the point from which the explosions were witnessed by those present at Roadside. I am satisfied that it was at a distance of approximately 9 miles from each of the ground zeros. 39. On the day of each detonation, a countdown procedure took place. It was facilitated by a public address system. When the time for detonation was reasonably close all those present at Roadside were directed to assemble at Observation Hill. I am satisfied that on each occasion approximately 150 persons were present, these being the personnel regularly in residence at Roadside, together with personnel who had been brought out of the forward area out of range of the explosions. The evidence satisfies me that detonation did not take place until all procedures necessary to ensure that all personnel were out of the forward area, and were assembled together at Observation Hill, had been complied with. At the final stages of the countdown those present were commanded to turn and face away from the detonation zone, put their hats over their faces and force their knuckles into their eyes. This procedure was obviously designed to prevent ocular damage from the flash of the exploding device. The bomb was then detonated. I am satisfied that the flash was such that the brightness of it was visible through the hands. Dingwall described his being able to see the bones of his hand at the point of time when they were still being held firmly against his face. This phenomenon was corroborated by a scientist, Professor Moroney, who gave evidence on a number of matters in these proceedings. I am also satisfied that there was a very noticeable sensation of heat on the back of the neck experienced by those present whilst their backs were turned to the point of explosion. After a short period of time a command was given over the public address system that persons present should turn. It was then that the after-effects of the explosion could be witnessed. 40. Dingwall says that he was frightened on each occasion. He does not suggest, however, that he was overcome by terror or that he lost control of his emotions. Nor is it suggested in the evidence that anyone present on any of the occasions was overcome by apprehension. Dingwall, in his evidence, was able to describe the explosion and its after-effects without visible emotion in a fairly matter of fact way. He spoke of "a big red ball...disappearing into the sky with the white and black of smoke and dust associated with it floating away". 41. Professor Moroney gave a far more graphic description of the Tadje explosion, which was the first atomic explosion that he had ever witnessed. As his description is heavily relied upon in Dingwall's case, it is desirable that I set it out in full. I accept it as an accurate description of what he, Dingwall, and others present, would have seen. When asked what he saw Professor Moroney gave the following evidence:- "... the fireball was still luminous. It was moving, rising rapidly, the gases were circulating very, very vigorously and you could see that from the colours in the fireball that it was against, ... The fireball itself was against a pattern of smoke trails, triangular grid of smoke trails laid by a set of rockets which had been fired just before the nuclear explosion to provide a backdrop for the high speed photography which was a very important part of the information being obtained. So one saw this luminous disc, or near luminous disc, against a white triangular grid of rocket trails ... The fireball rose quite quickly, the distance was about 14 or 15 kilometres away, ground fairly flat so it stood on the skyline quite clearly, there was nothing behind it. By about 15 seconds it had essentially ceased to be luminous and it was starting to turn to a grey/brown/brown/grey colour as it entrained soil swept up from the ground surface. The entrainment of soil ... about twenty seconds I could see the shock waves spreading out across the forward area from the point of detonation and it was lifting the surface soil as it came and shaking the scrub, ruffling it, so you could see the progression of the shock wave emanating from point of explosion but obviously see it much more clearly coming towards you, towards me. It reminded me very much of a speeded-up version of when one's at the seaside and a weather change comes and it generates across the surface of the water and you see the, ... pattern change on the surface of the water as the front goes through. But, of course, it was faster than that ... We felt it for one or two seconds. It was like encountering a stiff wind but only momentarily, it was a peculiar experience; flattened your clothes against you. ... A couple of seconds after that the sound wave came ... Those 30 seconds were silent and then the sound came through. It was not a loud bang but rather an extended loud rumble ... What was happening was the rising cloud because that contained the radioactive debris which was going to be distributed as fallout. Now at about a minute the cloud had lifted, risen quite substantially, and it was drawing up from the ground surface a great deal of loose material which was being swept in by ... after winds, ... coming in horizontally to the point of explosion and rising up, heavily burdened with dark coloured material, and chasing up ... the rising cloud, meeting it and continuing to rise up with it and you can see why it is called a mushroom cloud ... and then the heavy material was cascading out and it looked very much like a series of grey waterfalls as this soil was swept up and became too heavy to remain airborne and then fell back and cascaded down and remained near the site itself ... It essentially ceased because the cloud was then too high and the updraft to lift the soil off was much too small. ... At about 15 minutes the cloud had continued to rise and slowing, slowing, slowing and by, ... about 15 minutes it was stabilising in altitude and starting to diffuse and disperse and then move off on the prevailing winds ... The cloud had stabilised at about 10,000 feet." 42. Obviously it was an awe-inspiring spectacle, especially for one who had not seen it previously. The subsequent detonation of Biak and Taranaki would have been similar, with Taranaki, no doubt, because of its far greater force and height being the most impressive of all. Professor Moroney's evidence satisfies me that, for all concerned, the short time leading up to and following the detonation was a period of high excitement. At the conclusion of the period of observation, no formal order was given to disperse. People present just drifted away to take up their duties, there being, of course, some excited conversation about what had occurred. I am satisfied that the large group gathered on Observation Hill on each occasion consisted of service personnel resident at Roadside, scientists involved in the tests, engineers who had been involved in setting up the site and also persons with a major role in the organising of the tests. It would certainly have been known to Dingwall and other members of the support staff at Roadside that persons of great scientific knowledge and officers well up the chain of command were present with them at the site and were exposed in the same way to the explosion and its after effects. 43. Dingwall says that he watched "it" for a fair period of time and then went back to his tent "and kept coming out and looking at it all the time". He said he had a feeling of anxiety. He thought that "the dust - the wind could change, dust could come back and fall out all over us". He said that he kept coming out and looking at the dust and worrying about it. He did this while getting the meal ready in the mess. He also remembered that he raced in and had a couple of showers because of the dust. During the evening he kept coming out to have a look, even though it was dark and he could see nothing. He said that he was worried that he wouldn't be able to look after his family, presumably on the basis that he feared some physical consequences from the explosion or the dust. 44. It is difficult to know what to make of this evidence. I am satisfied that, as part of preliminary training, Dingwall had been advised that radioactive material should be washed off the body. If he did not know this before he came to Maralinga, he would certainly have become aware of it, at least through conversation, because this washing procedure was part of the decontamination requirements for those who had been to radioactive areas. These procedures were conducted by the unit known as the Health Physics Unit in premises especially set up for this purpose. Dingwall, as a mess steward at Roadside, was never required to undergo these procedures but he would have known of them. Although I am satisfied that Dingwall had in mind the dangerous propensities of radioactive fallout, I am not persuaded that he compulsively showered to the extent that he suggests in his evidence. There was no suggestion that he was ordered to do so or that it was even suggested to the personnel present at Roadside that it was a sensible or necessary precaution. 45. Moreover, I am satisfied that each detonation of the Antler series was carefully planned having regard to meteorological information to ensure that the dust drawn up into the atmosphere by the explosion would be carried by the prevailing wind away from the Roadside area further out onto the range. The wind did not change and fallout from the explosion was not a problem. Any radioactive dust would have been deposited more than 9 miles away and certainly not in the area of the Roadside village. I am satisfied that this would have applied in respect of each of the explosions. Indeed, it is not Dingwall's case, as presented on his behalf, that he was exposed to any harmful level of radiation whilst he was at Maralinga, either from the detonation of the nuclear devices or from any radioactive material resulting from those detonations. 46. Although he asserts that, in his view, he was so exposed and is still likely to suffer physical harm, no evidence has been brought to support this fear. I must regard it as baseless. 47. Dingwall relies upon other events which he says occurred at Maralinga. He shared a tent with Corporal Henley. The Corporal had been present as earlier tests. I accept Dingwall's evidence that Henley had with him in the tent a piece of green glazed material which he used as a paper weight. It is apparent that material of this kind was produced by the effect of heat from bomb blasts on sand and soil. Evidence in the case establishes to my satisfaction that glazed areas existed around old ground zeros from previous detonations. I am prepared to accept that Henley had acquired a piece of this material at some stage and had it in the tent. There is no definite evidence that it had dangerous radioactive properties at the time. Henley, although a rank above Dingwall, was clearly regarded by him as a friend. If Dingwall had been frightened by the presence of this material in the tent, he would have complained to Henley and conveyed to him his fears. I am satisfied that he would not have stood silently by if he had, in any significant sense, apprehended danger. It must be remembered that it is not his case that there was any actual danger or that he has suffered any harm from the presence of this material in the tent. The question simply is whether its presence put him in any significant state of fear causing him psychological shock. There is nothing to suggest that it did so. 48. Reliance is also placed upon assertions by Dingwall that he and Henley made some eight or nine expeditions into the off-road areas around Roadside for the purpose of setting dingo traps. Dingwall asserts that this was done because the South Australian Government was offering a bounty on dingoes and they were able to make some extra money. It is strange evidence. On the one hand Dingwall asserts that he lived in dread of radioactive dust to the extent that he compulsively showered whenever he came in contact with any dust at all; on the other, he claims that he and Henley ventured afield into potentially dangerous areas without concern. In cross-examination he seemed to resile from the suggestion that such expeditions had taken them into areas to the north of Roadside which had been designated as contaminated areas. Although I do not think Dingwall was attempting to mislead me, there is a strong likelihood that, with the passage of time and the advent of his current psychiatric state, his recollection of these matters is distorted. I am not prepared to accept that he went into designated dangerous areas even when affected by alcohol. More importantly, I do not accept that he was significantly affected by fear, at Maralinga, at the thought of his having done so. Insofar as his case depends upon these allegations, I reject them. 49. It is clear that, from time to time, Dingwall was required to go by vehicle to areas north of the boom gate at Roadside for the purpose of taking morning tea to scientists and other personnel working on the sites where detonations were to occur. The evidence of Professor Moroney, together with detailed maps that he has produced of the situation at the time of the Antler tests at which he was present in a scientific capacity, satisfies me that these journeys would have been along established sealed roads to sites which were not in dangerous areas. On these occasions Dingwall's duties were simply to transport the necessary food, drink and utensils to the site where the other personnel were working, wait while the meal was consumed, then gather up the utensils and materials and take them back in the vehicle to Roadside. Clearly there was some waiting time involved at the site. These sites were in desert areas. There were in their vicinity, but at not inconsiderable distance, the ground zeros of explosions in the earlier Buffalo series. Dingwall gave evidence of filling in time, whilst waiting for the scientists to finish their morning tea, by taking a walk from the site of the work to a crater. He gave evidence that it was about the size of a football or hockey field and was about 30-40 feet deep. Around the perimeter of it was "fused glass and burnt mulga. The glass was green, lumpy, jadey looking stuff, like something that comes out of a boiler". He says that he got to within 20 feet of the "green, jadey looking stuff". He then realised what it was and "went for my life". 50. As best as one can determine from his evidence, the site to which he and Henley had driven on this occasion was the site of the future Biak explosion. I am satisfied on the evidence that there was no crater in the area which remotely answered to the description that he has given. The ground zero for the Marcoo explosion in the Buffalo series was, I am satisfied, the only area where a crater had been produced. The explosion had taken place at ground level. The crater did not approximate remotely, in depth or extent, to that described by Dingwall. It had to be approached up a rise. It was not possible to gain any impression of its depth until the actual lip was reached. It would not have been a easy matter to approach it from the Biak site. Having regard to the onus that lies upon Dingwall, I am not persuaded that he underwent this allegedly frightening experience. 51. Dingwall gave evidence in relation to his film badge. He said that it changed colour after he had been at Maralinga for some time. Indeed, as his evidence progressed, he suggested that this happened in respect of more than one film badge. I am prepared to accept that there was one occasion when he formed the view that there had been a change of colour, apparently from grey to black. Other evidence in the case satisfies me that the outer casing of the badges could gradually change colour through exposure to the elements. Such changes were not sudden. As already indicated, such a colour change had no relationship to exposure to radioactivity. I am prepared to accept that Dingwall became aware of a colour change to his badge and that he then handed it in to an orderly corporal. He was given another one in exchange and no comment was made about the condition of the one he handed in. It is a strange piece of evidence. I am prepared to accept that Dingwall was under a misapprehension as to the significance of colour changes to the exterior surface of the badge and that he handed it in the belief that a colour change had occurred. I am not persuaded, however, that he was in any state of fear, let alone terror, as a result of what he had observed on the badge. He was told not to worry about it. He never heard anything more about it. In my view, he has come to worry about it, in a neurotic way, only with the passage of considerable time. I am not persuaded that it was a matter of great concern, let alone of psychological shock to him, at the time. 52. Dingwall states that he started to drink heavily while at Maralinga and that he also got into fights. He says that he had nightmares about "the bomb" and would wake up apprehensive and feeling guilty. In effect, he says he took to drinking excessively to drown his worries. This is difficult evidence to evaluate. Clearly he and others had a lot of time on their hands. I am satisfied that there was a lot of talk which could well have been of a disturbing kind to Dingwall. No doubt the men talked amongst themselves of the effect of radiation and the possibility of genetic problems resulting from it. Dingwall may very well have experienced some transient concern about these matters and been happy to forget them in the canteen. All this is possible, indeed probably normal in the situation. However, there is no suggestion in the evidence that he became so disturbed as to be unable to carry out his duties or that he displayed psycho-neurotic symptoms. I think that it is very likely that he resented being at Maralinga, particularly at Roadside. One gains the clear impression that Roadside was uncomfortable and unpleasant and, for the most part, boring. Also, it contrasted unfavourably and, to his mind, unfairly, with conditions at the Maralinga village. 53. He took leave and returned home to his family before the completion of his tour of duty at Maralinga. He says that he did so because he was concerned about them. The nature of the concerns was not spelled out in any detail. They were, of course, safe and well-housed with his wife's parents. He may well have felt some concern that his wife would be having difficulty coping with such a large number of small children. The detail as to the granting of the leave and the reasons for it does not appear in the evidence. I find myself unable to attribute any particular significance to it in the context of the case. He returned to Maralinga and completed his duties. 54. At some point of time, apparently after the last explosion, he suffered an attack of vomiting and diarrhoea. He asserts that this required hospitalisation. There are no records of such hospitalisation, but I am satisfied that he was admitted to hospital at Maralinga and was treated for his complaints. The nature of those complaints is, of course, consistent with problems that he had had previously which were obviously not related to service at Maralinga. He does not claim that the onset of these symptoms was associated with any feelings of acute anxiety relating to exposure to radiation. I am simply unable to attribute any particular significance to this period of hospitalisation although I am satisfied it occurred. He appears to have later become quite distressed at the absence of records relating to this hospitalisation. Considerable evidence was directed to this question. I am quite unable to draw any inference from their absence. I am certainly not prepared to find that any "cover-up" occurred. 55. Finally, Dingwall gave evidence of an incident involving an Aboriginal family wandering in from desert areas where they might have been exposed to radioactive fallout. It is difficult to see what relevance this incident could have to the claim on Dingwall's part that he suffered psychiatric injury at Maralinga. He does not assert that the incident caused him any personal anxiety. He gave evidence of it without apparent distress. He was cross-examined on the basis that it was a fabrication and, in fact, evidence was given as to the occurrence of such an incident at a time before Dingwall was posted to Maralinga. I am not persuaded that Dingwall has fabricated the incident, but, on a consideration of the evidence, I cannot see that it has any conceivable relevance to the claim that he brings. If anything, it tends to suggest that he was not living in a state of constant horror of radiation. If that were so one would have expected that he would have sought to avoid contact with the Aboriginals and any radioactive dust that they might have had upon their person or clothing. 56. During his period of leave from Maralinga Mrs Dingwall noticed a difference in him. She gave the following evidence:- "This was the first time I had ever seen him what I would call nervy ... He had suddenly become a very restless sleeper ... I could only call it as if he had been wrestling the bed. He just - sheets and blankets would be everywhere and he never seemed to keep still ..." 57. He also described Maralinga to her as being "hell on earth". 58. Upon completion of his period of duty at Maralinga, he spent some time at home with her before being posted to the Royal Military College at Duntroon. She gave the following evidence as to her observations of him in this period:- "He was very very tired. This is where his sleeping pattern seemed to be either complete agitation or he would sleep 13-14 hours as if he was thoroughly exhausted ... From that time on waking him became quite a feat. The idea was to wake him up very, very gently because if you kind of bounced into the room and said, hey, time to get up or something like that, he'd practically shoot out of the bed." 59. I accept that Mrs Dingwall observed changes in her husband after he returned from Maralinga. These changes must be evaluated in the context of the whole of the evidence including the expert testimony in the case. I shall return to this question later. 60. Dingwall took up duties at the Royal Military College as a mess steward. He performed those duties for about nine months. He had problems with his health. He commenced vomiting blood again. This was in the context that he was drinking heavily. He said, in evidence, that he drank a lot and that sometimes he would be drinking beer or whatever he could get. Indeed, he said that he drank every chance he had and that this was every day. 61. The vomiting of blood occasioned his admission to the hospital at Duntroon where he was investigated for a possible gastric ulcer. After he was discharged from that hospital he was admitted approximately a week later to RGH Concord for similar investigations. The records indicate that he complained that his job as a steward worried him a good deal and also that he consumed a bottle of brandy every second night. In his evidence before me he claimed that the symptoms which led to his admission to hospital occurred in the context of his having "flashbacks" and nightmares about the bomb at Maralinga. The flashbacks involved periods of disorientation during the day, associated with anxiety and guilt. He gave fairly graphic descriptions of these occurrences in evidence upon direct questioning from myself. He was adamant, again on direct questioning, that he had told the doctors who examined him not only that he had been at Maralinga but that he was having these severe emotional symptoms. There is, however, no record of any such reported occurrences in his medical file. This is despite the fact that, in his evidence, he alleged that the episodes were similar to "having a fit". I shall return to the question of these alleged flashbacks later in these reasons. He also indicated that he was involved in fighting whilst at Duntroon. 62. He applied for a transfer from Duntroon to some other posting which would bring him closer to Sydney. The basis of the application was a desire to be closer to his family and to take a more active role in the bringing up of his young children who were becoming something of a problem. The transfer was recommended and he was posted to 3 National Service Training Battalion at Ingleburn. It is of significance that this posting was not as a mess steward or canteen attendant. He undertook and passed a training course in weapons handling in order to become a weapons instructor for National Service recruits. It is clear that this course and the subsequent duties performed by him involved him in operating small arms, firing them on the range and being present while they were fired. He was, thus, subjected, on a fairly regular basis, to the explosions associated with the operation of such weapons. He does not suggest that he experienced any problems in performing these duties over a period of about two years. He says that he moderated his drinking to some extent whilst at Ingleburn. His wife and family joined him in married quarters at Ingleburn, having been separated from him whilst he was a Duntroon. His wife noticed that he was, in her opinion, drinking to excess, a problem which she had never been aware of before. She remonstrated with him about this and it led to arguments. 63. During the period he was at Ingleburn, his medical records indicated that he had three gastric attacks requiring medical attention. 64. In January 1960, Dingwall was posted to Area Command at Randwick to perform duties as a mess steward. He says that he was in charge of the messes at Randwick. His family moved into married quarters with him. It is apparent that he continued to drink heavily and this led to arguments with his wife. He began to have problems with his right knee, which ultimately required that he submit to a right medial meniscectomy for removal of a torn right medial meniscus. It is clear from the medical reports that this knee gave him trouble both before and after the operation. There are many sick reports relating to the painful right knee which involved him, on occasions, in seeing specialists. There are also reports of serious nose bleeds, which were related to chronic sinus disease, in itself related to his earlier activities as an amateur boxer. 65. On 10 May 1960 there is a sick report recording "anxiety state". On 15 May 1961 there is a further reference in a sick report to "bronchitis/depression". There is no further detail as to these matters, nor does Dingwall give any evidence specifically related to them. He states in evidence that he was having dreams which were worse at Randwick, but that he did not tell anybody about them as there was no-one to tell. 66. Whilst at Ingleburn he had enlisted in the Army for a further three years and in November 1961, he re-enlisted for a further three years. 67. In May 1961 he was posted to Kapooka as a mess steward. So much appears from his Army records. He does not appear to give any evidence as to this period. Presumably his family was not with him. He obviously continued to drink as he got into a fight, which he instigated, with another corporal, as a result of which he was reduced in rank to private. There followed a posting to Victoria Barracks as a mess steward where he remained until July 1964. His medical reports indicate that he continued to have problems with the right leg and also with nose bleeds which required hospitalisation. He suffered bronchial asthma in September 1962. In November 1962 his promotion to corporal lapsed through a failure to complete certain necessary subjects. In the same month a sick report indicated that he suffered from an anxiety state and in the subsequent month a sick report indicated that he suffered from "persistent headache and neurosis (some change in personality, recommended to see a psychiatrist)". These matters are not the subject of any specific evidence from him. It is difficult to evaluate their significance. It must be noted, however, that they both occur in the context of the failed promotion. 68. Dingwall remained at Victoria Barracks until 27 July 1964, when he was posted to 108 Supply Depot Ingleburn. Whilst at Victoria Barracks his duties changed to that of maintenance dutyman and he also obtained a qualification as a driver class III. As appears from his medical records he continued to have difficulty with his right knee and his problems with nose bleeds were also evident. In April 1964 he was admitted to RGH Concord in relation to this problem. The problem recurred in May and in June he was examined by a specialist. 69. At Ingleburn, he performed the duties of warehouse equipment officer and obtained a qualification as warehouse equipment operator class 3. He continued to have problems with nose bleeds. It appears that these were so bad as to cause anaemia. He reported sick with this problem no less than eight times in September and October of 1964. It may be noted that in his evidence and that of his wife, reference is made to anaemia, it being asserted that they felt some concern as to whether it might be related to exposure to radiation at Maralinga. It seems clear enough that it was in fact related to Dingwall's problem with nose bleeding, which had occurred before he went to Maralinga. There would be, so far as the evidence goes, no apparent reason why the Dingwalls should have had any concerns about radiation in relation to this particular physical ailment of Dingwall. 70. In October 1964 Dingwall re-enlisted in the Army for a further three years. His re-engagement documents indicated that he was "unfit for marching, PT exercises and long standing". This restriction, no doubt, related to his continuing difficulties with his right knee. 71. In 1965 he qualified as a warehouse equipment operator class II and passed some subjects for promotion to corporal RAASC. On 26 May 1965 it is reported that he suffered "severe epistaxis causing blood loss". He also had a basal cell carcinoma removed from the left side of his neck in July 1965. I note that this condition was originally claimed as being related to his Maralinga service. No evidence has been offered to suggest that any such connection existed. In any event, it does not appear that it resulted in any ongoing problems. 72. On 26 July 1965 Dingwall was posted to H/QSSM (Randwick) where he performed the duties of mess steward in the catering corp. He qualified as a steward and was promoted to the rank of temporary corporal. In December 1965 he qualified as a mess supervisor and early in 1966 he was promoted to temporary sergeant, group 2, mess supervisor. His medical records indicate that he fractured a toe on his right foot requiring short hospitalisation, and that he continued to have pain in the right knee. In January 1966 the medical records indicate that he suffered a recurrence of asthma, the previous occurrence seemingly having occurred in September 1962. It appears that this condition did not settle immediately and required treatment. 73. In June 1966 an Army medical examination noted that he had a disability in the right knee, some hearing loss and obesity. He was classified as being unfit for prolonged marching or standing, unfit when good hearing was required, and unfit for service in the field. In August 1966 he reported sick once again with asthma. 74. In October 1966 he re-enlisted for a further three years with the matters of medical unfitness noted on his re-engagement sheet. 75. On 18 December 1966 Dingwall was posted to H/QPNG command at Port Moresby as a mess steward. In his evidence, Dingwall asserted that he was in fact in charge of the officer's mess and the men's messes. It is not clear whether this was to have been a long term or short term posting. He was not accompanied by his family who continued to live at Randwick. 76. In his evidence Dingwall said that his health was terrible in New Guinea. He said that he was "getting these flashbacks and the asthma and I developed asthma, very bad asthma". He averred that he had never had asthma before although later in his evidence, when questioned about the earlier reported attacks in his medical records, he said that the type of asthma that he suffered in New Guinea was different from that which he had previously. I can find no basis in the medical evidence for any such distinction. I conclude that the asthma which he undoubtedly suffered in New Guinea was, at most, an exacerbation of a pre-existing condition. 77. Dingwall said that he told the doctor in Port Moresby, a civilian doctor, about the flashbacks but that he couldn't say very much because he thought he was still under the "Secrets Act" and consequently could not talk about anything that happened at Maralinga. He said that he received the response from the doctor that the doctor "knew nothing about radiation or anything like that". This evidence was fairly typical of evidence given by Dingwall throughout the case on the subject of reporting "visions" and concerns about Maralinga. I shall refer to this topic later. 78. It appears that the asthma attack was very severe in its onset, requiring, according to Dingwall, the administration of oxygen. The sick report refers to "asthma, difficulty in breathing, anxiety++". Although reliance is placed upon this entry by Dingwall, I should say, at this stage, that I have difficulty in seeing how it supports a case of psychiatric illness resulting from experiences at Maralinga. Dingwall was choking and seriously distressed by the asthma attack. Anxiety would be a perfectly natural concomitant. 79. Dingwall was admitted to Port Moresby General Hospital as his asthma could not be relieved. He was treated, apparently, with injections of adrenalin and, once the condition had stabilised, was put on a regime of cortisone medication. It was decided that he could not continue service in the tropical climate of New Guinea and that he should be returned to Australia. A further matter was added to his medical classification: namely, that he was "unfit for service in the field or tropical climates". Asthma was added to the list of accepted medical problems on his medical classification. 80. On return to Australia, he was posted to the Recruit Training Battalion at Kapooka for about six months, his family continuing to reside at Randwick. He continued to suffer from asthma but, apparently, it was controlled by medication. He alleges, however, that he had "flashbacks" twice a week, being visions during the waking hours, and also nightmares nearly every night. He continued to drink heavily at the sergeant's mess, sometimes becoming drunk. Notwithstanding this, according to his evidence, he was in charge of the officer's mess, with the rank of sergeant, and performed his duties capably. 81. From Wagga he was transferred, at his request, to Singleton in order to be closer to his family. At Singleton he was once again in charge of the officer's mess. After about a week he suffered asthma and hypertension. He was transferred to 2 Camp Hospital at Ingleburn where he remained under treatment for about a month. He was treated for asthma and hypertension. On discharge from the hospital he returned to Singleton Barracks but after three days, suffered another asthma attack. He was placed for a brief time in Singleton Hospital and then transferred to 2 Camp Hospital again. He estimated that he was hospitalised on this occasion for three to four months. He said, in effect, that he was treated for asthma, hypertension and was fully examined. He was also sent to the hospital at Concord for tests, the nature of which he could not recall. He gave evidence of speaking to a doctor, subsequently identified as Dr Grainger-Smith who he at first said "just fobbed (him) off". Later, in cross-examination, he said that he told this doctor about his experiences at Maralinga and his flashbacks . He thought Dr Grainger-Smith was a psychiatrist. Later in his cross-examination he became quite specific about having a conversation with Dr Grainger-Smith. He gave the following evidence:- "I remember Dr Grainger-Smith was looking after the chaps that came back from Vietnam and I was there and he must have gone through my record and he found that I was in Maralinga. He might have been interested - I had no idea what it is - and he called me into his office and spoke to me and he asked me about Maralinga and he said 'How do you feel about it?' and I said - 'This could have been mixed up with all the asthma and that,' I think that was his idea of it and I was saying that I had nightmares and visions of Maralinga all the time and that's all I said to him. HIS HONOUR: Did he ask you or did you tell him what the nightmares and visions were?---No, I just said - I may have but I can't remember exactly what I told him. And this was one occasion when, you said, he called you to the office?---Yes, into his clinic where he had the - - - But it was a specific occasion and so far as you could see it was specifically for the purpose of asking you about Maralinga?---Why I think I had asthma and then the Maralinga came - he knew about Maralinga and he said 'Did you have any' - I think he said 'Did you have bad experiences in Maralinga?' or something. I do not know that I quite follow you there. Do you have a recollection of him asking you why you thought you had asthma?--- Yes. And in that context he asked you something about Maralinga?---Yes, your Honour; yes. Was this by way of a consultation with him?---Well, I was in 2-Camp Hospital and he was a major in charge of the hospital; yes, it would have been a consultation. He called me away from everyone else into his rooms so I expect that's what it would be, yes. Was the doctor or someone in the room taking any notes of the consultation, you remember?---He was doing things himself and writing and what have you, yes." 82. I shall refer later to the evidence of Dr Grainger-Smith as to his contact with Dingwall. 83. It appears that Dingwall's state of health caused the military authorities to consider the question whether he was fit for service in the Army. Dingwall's medical records contain reports of examinations made for the purpose of his classification in this period. They were, obviously, extensive medical examinations. The results refer to Dingwall's physical condition. They contain no reference to Maralinga, or complaints relating to his service there, or to emotional problems. In fact the portion of the form referring to "emotional stability" is ticked to indicate a positive finding. The same is true of the medical record containing the evaluation of his condition upon his return from New Guinea. 84. The final Medical Board report which led to his being discharged from the Army placed his incapacity for service at 65%, comprising: asthma 40%, obesity 5%, hypertension 5%, right knee 10%, high tone hearing loss 5%. For retirement benefits purposes, he was classified as having an incapacity for civilian employment amounting to 40%. 85. It appears that Dingwall was unaware that the question of his fitness to continue in the Army was under consideration. I am satisfied that, when he was advised that he was considered unfit to continue in the service and that he was to be discharged, the news came as a great shock to him. His wife testified that when he conveyed the news to her he was clearly distraught. Obviously, it had not been his intention to leave the Army and return to civilian life. I am satisfied that whatever complaints he might have had as to Army life, he embraced the financial security that it provided and was distressed at the thought of giving that up. 86. He was formally discharged from the Army as medically unfit for further service on 19 April 1968. Thereafter he made a claim for invalidity benefits with the DFRDB. He listed his disabilities as chronic bronchial asthma, recurring arthritis and stiffness in the knee. He made no claim for any psychiatric or psychological disturbances. Nor did he make any claims relating to service at Maralinga, or to possible injury from radiation. In this context, it must be noted that he testified that from time to time, he would endeavour to bring up with Army doctors his fears about radiation damage and its possible relationship with symptoms he was suffering, such as gastric symptoms, but was always "fobbed off". Alternatively, he felt that he could not raise the matter because of the "Secrets Act". In my view, it is noteworthy that, having been discharged from the Army in a situation where he might well have sought to maximise his pension entitlements, he nevertheless made no mention of these matters in what was a formal claim for invalidity benefits. 87. It appears that the Dingwalls purchased a mixed business at Maroubra, being a shop with a residence attached. The business quickly failed and was closed in August 1968. No doubt Dingwall had problems in running it due to his inexperience, but it is clear that the failure was occasioned largely by his drinking problem. This is clearly his wife's view and he certainly agreed in his evidence that he was not functioning very well at the time because of drink. Dingwall was asked by counsel what was his state of mind while running the shop. He gave the following evidence:- I was worrying about the future all the time, you know. Things weren't very bright because I'd been in the army and the money was there all the time and while I was in the shop the - I wasn't getting the same sort of money as I was in the army and - - - And your relationship with your wife and family?---I was feeling guilty about not being able to give the money, you know - have the money for her. What about the visions; had they gone?---No they were still there." 88. Dingwall was treated by a local doctor, Dr Blows, at this time. She found that he was suffering from sudden attacks of depression, forgetfulness and attacks of rage. She makes no reference to any complaints about visions or flashbacks. Dingwall said that he made no mention to her of anxiety or flashbacks because he was "sick and tired of talking to doctors about it. They just didn't seem to understand or take any notice." This evidence is most difficult to accept. Dingwall did not assert that he felt constrained to say nothing about Maralinga and associated experiences because of the "Secrets Act". He was now dealing with an apparently sympathetic civilian doctor but chose, for the reason that he had been "fobbed off" by Army doctors, not to confide in her the symptoms which form a major component of the case that he now brings. 89. Dingwall was clearly evincing signs of depression in the context of his having recently been discharged from the Army and being confronted with the failing of the business. Dr Blows acquainted the DFRDB authorities with her concerns. She said that Dingwall should see a psychiatrist. In August 1968 he was examined by Dr Phelps, of the Commonwealth Department of Health, who noted that at that stage he was suffering from anxiety and depression. It was considered that psychiatric assessment should be done and an increase of his percentage incapacity would be appropriate, if he were suffering from a psychiatric condition attributable to Army service. 90. As a result, Dingwall was examined by Dr Greenberg, an experienced psychiatrist, on 7 March 1969. Dr Greenberg reported in the following terms:- "Mr. Dingwall is suffering from a Depressive State of moderately severe degree which has persisted apparently since its onset in 1965/66 during the period he was working at Victoria Barracks. This Depressive State is of a type which should be susceptible to appropriate treatment and he is clearly in need of such treatment. His disability in consequence of this depression appears to have been complete during the period after his discharge from the Army till the failure of his business in September, 1968; from his history it seems clear that his depression was a major, if not the major, cause of the failure of his business undertaking. Since then he has been working, of necessity, as a cook at the Prince of Wales Hospital though requiring some time off sick. He is clearly having considerable difficulty in keeping up with this work because of his Depressive State so that I would say he is at least fifty percent (50%) disabled by his depression at the present time." 91. The interview that Dingwall had with Dr Greenberg, for the purpose of this report, is important in this case. Dingwall gave evidence that he had spoken to Dr Greenberg about his Maralinga and "flashback" problems. He felt able to do so because Dr Greenberg was, in his view, an Army psychiatrist. This, presumably, allowed some loosening of the bonds imposed by the "Secrets Act". Dr Greenberg was called. He had no recollection of the interview, apart from his notes and report. However, he stated that it was the type of interview that he held in those days, on behalf of the Commonwealth authorities, to determine whether a claimant was suffering from a psychiatric condition connected with his service. He would have expected that Dingwall would have been aware that that was the nature and purpose of the interview. His notes of the interview were tendered and he gave the following evidence based upon them:- "Mr Dingwall complained of episodes of insomnia and jumpiness, said that he wakened easily and was generally restless. He wakened with somatic feelings of rage, but there were no ideas associated with these feelings, that he had no dreams associated with them, that these feelings lasted three to four minutes. They occurred about once per week with the same frequencies since onset. In general he was more irritable and less tolerant, for example of children and sometimes of his wife. He was depressed, especially in the morning over the previous three to four years. He was apprehensive of meeting new people. He had lost interest in things. He said he could not be bothered with anything, for example fishing or swimming. He had had to close a business in September 1968 because of his health and that he had lost all his money some $1 800 in this. That at this time he had been cooking at the Prince of Wales Hospital for 5 1/2 months, working some 40 hours per week. That he had some time off with asthma. He complained of being very nervy and over reactive when driving. His asthma was worse some days, than others. He complained of headache two to three times per week and this was from his forehead radiating to the back of his head and sharp in character and lasting 20 to 30 minutes and he got no relief from aspirin and similar drugs. He had been taking prednisone presumably prescribed for his asthma for some nine months altogether and had ceased it some six months before his interview. He had gained weight while taking it and seemed not to have lost it since. He thought that he was more nervy and tense when taking the prednisone. He thought that the depression had come on him when working at Victoria Barracks three to four years before this, that is in 1965-66. He thought it was just through boredom or something, he said, and he thought it had become a little worse as time had gone on. He complained that his memory for recent events had been poor over the previous two to three years where his memory for remote events was intact. He said that his concentration was fair if he were interested. His previous health, he said, had been good, he'd not suffered from any nervous disorder nor was it through any family history of nervous disorder. And, I thought that he presented with a depressive state apparently the endogenous type which would be amenable to appropriate treatment and that this had started during his service." 92. Dr Greenberg further gave evidence that he considered the depression from which he found Dingwall to suffering was endogenous, i.e. originating within the sufferer and not having any obvious external precipitant. The reference to an absence of dreams would have resulted from specific questions asked by the doctor of Dingwall, but he also stated with certainty that if Dingwall had spoken to him about experiences at Maralinga he would have recorded them. 93. This evidence indicates that at a period fairly shortly after Dingwall was discharged from the Army and when he was suffering from a psychiatric disturbance he did not, when the opportunity was given to him, relate any of his problems to service at Maralinga or to dreams or flashbacks relating to that service. Although he had been discharged from the Army, predominantly because of his incapacitation through asthma, he did not, in mentioning asthma to Dr Greenberg, relate its onset to any anxiety experienced from recollection of events at Maralinga or flashback experiences relating to those events. He specifically denied having any relevant dreams. Quite apart from relating his problems to Maralinga, he specifically related them to "boredom" experienced whilst working at Victoria Barracks three or four years before. Moreover, he stated to the doctor that his previous health, which, in the context, must have meant his health previous to 1965-66, had been good and he had not suffered from any nervous disorder. I shall make further reference to this material at a later stage. 94. Following Dr Greenberg's report, a further examination was undertaken on behalf of the DFRDB authorities by Dr Lilley of the Department of Health. This took place on 11 June 1969. He found that Dingwall's depressive state had improved and that he was apparently contented in his then employment as a cook. He gave a favourable prognosis, which resulted in the overall degree of incapacity accepted for pension purposes, being increased to only 50%. 95. After the failure of the Maroubra business, Dingwall worked as a driver and a labourer. However, in November 1968, as a result of an Army contact, he obtained work as an undercook at the Prince of Wales Hospital and was able to learn this trade while on the job. This training stood him in good stead for future employment. In March 1969 he gained a job as a cook with Qantas in the kitchens at Mascot. He lost this employment as a result of some union dispute, the details of which are not clear in the evidence. Thereafter, he returned to a cooking position at the Prince of Wales Hospital and subsequently at the University of New South Wales. It is clear that he was not entirely happy in these occupations. He seems to have been uncomfortable in confined spaces and working in close proximity to others, a problem no doubt related to similar problems of a more severe kind that he experienced in later years. It seems that he remained under the care of Dr Blows for day to day medical problems. He states that he was "drinking a fair bit again" but "was coping". I am satisfied that his drinking was a problem, if not at work, then at least in the home. The drinking culminated in an incident in April 1970, about which he gives a very limited picture in his evidence, either through reluctance to speak of it or through a genuine failure to recall it. He characterised it as a "pushing and shoving" incident involving his eldest son and related to the son's failure in some university exams. Quite clearly, there was much more to it than that. 96. I am satisfied that he had returned late from shift work well under the influence of alcohol, that he made an attack upon his wife and that the sons came to her defence. The situation became ugly when he produced a knife. The police were called and he was taken away. No charges eventuated, but the next day he saw Dr Blows, who referred him to Dr Ellard, an experienced psychiatrist. I am satisfied that he made no reference to Dr Ellard of any problems relating to Maralinga or his experiencing anxiety or "flashbacks" in relation to his period of service or worries about radiation. Dr Ellard gave evidence, which I accept, that, although he had no recollection of the interview other than the report that he wrote at the time to Dr Blows, he would, nevertheless, because of the experience he had at the time with Air Force personnel, have regarded such information as of significance and have recorded it in his report to Dr Blows of 20 April 1970. In that report, he refers to the fact that Dingwall, in telling him about the incident, had "left out all the more spectacular bits". He gave his opinion in the following terms:- "I think the essence of the problem is that he has never grown up. Although he has high aspirations he has never done much about it and generally makes up for this deficiency by symbolically thumping his chest and proclaiming himself a man. The difficulty is that not everyone does what he wants them to do and he is then troubled by rage and depression. His sons are getting big enough to stand up for themselves and I think this is worrying him too, since he has dealt with them before by laying down the law. One of them stopped going to the university possibly because of the father's attempts to run his life for him. In essence then, I think that we are seeing the response of an inadequate man to the refusal of the world to dance the way that he wants it too (sic). Whether or not something fundamental can be done to help him is a bit difficult to say at this juncture but his stress was so great that I thought that we should hospitalise him for a week or two and see what can be done to bring the situation under control." 97. In effect, in what was an informal report to a fellow practitioner, Dr Ellard was providing a diagnosis of a personality disorder unrelated to any past trauma and having its genesis in Dingwall's genetic constitution. Dr Ellard affirmed this view in his oral evidence. 98. As a result of Dr Ellard's examination, Dingwall entered a private psychiatric hospital for a fortnight. This hospital was conducted by Dr Lonie, a colleague of Dr Ellard. She also reported to Dr Blows on 7 May 1970. She gave her opinion in the following terms:- "During his stay in hospital he had a fairly superficial look at himself, particularly his need to assert himself aggressively in any situation in which he found himself. Towards the end of his stay he was paying some lip service to the idea that continued chest thumping exhibitions might not really be required of him, but I suspect that this was more in the nature of an attempt to be a good boy to please the therapist, rather than any far reaching change. He has now bought a new house in the blue mountains, and says that he intends to lead a humble life driving a postal van. For some reason he seems to see this as a major advance for him, possibly because he can visualise himself as a large fish in a smaller pool. In fact I think his life is likely to go on much as before and would think there is little that can be done to alter the situation. I have asked him to come and see me again in a month but will be surprised if he does so. He is not on any medication." 99. It is interesting to note that Dingwall, in his evidence, says that at this period of time he was "still dreaming a lot and waking up in the night". Although this evidence is not specific, I consider that he was attempting to convey that he was suffering from dreams about experiences of Maralinga. It is quite obvious that during a period of a fortnight, whilst undergoing therapy in the hospital, he could not have raised the question of distressing dreams or flashbacks as being part of his problem. Undoubtedly, any such symptom would have been recorded and investigated. 100. As indicated in Dr Lonie's report, the decision had been made to leave Maroubra, in favour of residence in the Blue Mountains. A home had been found at Springwood and the family moved there in November 1970. Later they moved to a new address in Leura where they resided until moving to Port Macquarie in May 1979. During this period Dingwall's medical practitioner was Dr Packham of Springwood. It appears that he was a neighbour at Springwood and that some friendship developed between the families. He consulted Dr Packham for a number of complaints, none of which related to any experiences at Maralinga. During the same period he had three periodic reviews for the purposes of the DFRDB. Again, no complaint was made or investigated in relation to any problems allegedly resulting from his service at Maralinga. Dingwall says that he still had "the visions or flashbacks" from time to time. However, it is clear that he did not feel sufficiently concerned to seek any assistance from Dr Packham, despite the relationship of friendship which existed. 101. During the period when the Dingwalls were living in the Blue Mountains, Dingwall had a number of employments. He worked on a number of occasions as a cook, the first being with the NSW Government Railways on the Indian Pacific train. I am satisfied that he found cooking in the confined space of the train difficult and that he did not like the hours and the necessity of being away from home. It seems, however, that he was able to perform the work satisfactorily. He had other cooking jobs in restaurants and hospitals in the Blue Mountains, sometimes on a permanent basis and sometimes doing relief work. He also operated for a short time a fruit juice run. He also did labouring jobs. His wife's evidence gives a reasonable picture of his life and health during the period. He was, at times, moody and irritable, and at other times cheerful. At times he drank to excess. He was occasionally violent. The impression one gets is that his general behaviour and his moods were better than they had been whilst living in Sydney and that the relationship between the two was basically happy although, by no means, perfect. It is fairly plain that he would, from time to time have difficulty in coping with work. This was probably no different from the difficulty he had had in running the shop at Maroubra and probably related to the occasions when he over-indulged in alcohol. 102. Clearly, his general health was not good. In June 1971 he suffered what must have been a disturbing episode which his wife describes quite graphically. He had obtained a job in a large restaurant which was under construction in Penrith. He had assisted in the design of the kitchen where he was to become the chef. This had involved considerable work. It appears that he worked through a full night and then, without significant intervening sleep, drove to Sydney to observe a cadet parade at his younger son's school. Clearly this journey overtired him and shortly thereafter he suffered an episode of very bad headache and loss of sight. His eyesight returned after three days but, according to Mrs Dingwall, he has been inclined to suffer headaches since that occasion. Dr Packham diagnosed the problem as transient coronary ischaemia. Mrs Dingwall considers that there has been some minor after-effects mainly in relation to headaches. It is to be noted that there were subsequent occasions when he consulted Dr Packham for headaches and loss of vision, apparently temporary, in the right eye. 103. After moving to Leura, Dingwall obtained work as a cook at the Boddington Red Cross Hospital at Wentworth Falls. The work appeared to suit him and, apart from occasional bouts of drinking he was happy in the job. He was working at the hospital in Christmas 1977 when it was threatened by the major bushfires that occurred at that time. It appears that the fire was very close to the hospital and he assisted in the evacuation of elderly patients. He also assisted in the evacuation of patients from the Queen Victoria hospital. This activity made him very tired and agitated. Shortly thereafter, he suffered a collapse at work and what appears to have been an angina attack. He was advised by Dr Packham to give up the job as it was becoming too much for him. It seems that he had a heart condition which required that he did not undertake occupations which could be stressful. 104. He took some temporary employment in the area after leaving Boddington hospital, but the decision was made to move to Port Macquarie in order to take up work in that area. The Dingwalls moved to Port Macquarie in May 1979 and resided there for about 16 months. Despite the hopes of employment, this did not eventuate. This was obviously disappointing to him. When asked about his mental condition at this time, Mrs Dingwall said "he wasn't very happy about the fact he couldn't work and you know, he really did try. That was the first time actually I can remember that he would go around places and actually apply, you know." There were occasions when he drank to excess. He remained a restless sleeper and occasionally suffered from asthma attacks of an apparently minor kind. 105. In 1980 the couple moved to Ballina, again in search of work which proved to be unobtainable. Dingwall had been receiving unemployment benefits whilst at Port Macquarie. At Ballina he started to have trouble with his back. He came under the care of Dr Calnan, who was also a neighbour, and became a friend of the Dingwalls. Dr Calnan diagnosed lumbar scoliosis which would prevent Dingwall from ever returning to his work as a cook. He recommended that Dingwall apply for an invalid pension. This application was made with Dr Calnan's assistance on the basis of hypertension, chronic asthma, recurrent severe anaemia, complete deterioration of the spine with crushed thoracic vertebrae. After some dispute and an appeals hearing, this application was allowed and a full invalidity pension was granted in April 1983. 106. It is clear that Dr Calnan was interested in Dingwall and tended to his medical needs as they arose. It is equally clear that Dingwall made no complaints to the doctor, even though he consulted him in relation to depression, of any matters relating to experiences at Maralinga including troublesome flashbacks. Indeed, Dingwall agreed that from 1977 to 1982, in broad terms, Maralinga was not a matter of concern to him. In this regard I should indicate that I accept that, from time to time, he would tell Mrs Dingwall that he felt he had had a dose of radiation at Maralinga and would probably one day get cancer. I do not get the impression, however, that these occasional comments were taken particularly seriously. However, it appears that Dingwall was aware, with what degree of specificity is not clear, of personnel who served at Maralinga having subsequently died of cancer. 107. It appears that, in 1982, there was some newspaper publicity about the possibility of a Royal Commission into the Maralinga tests and, in the context of that publicity, Dingwall received a letter from the Commonwealth Department of Health enclosing a form of questionnaire for atomic weapons test personnel. The letter indicated that he had been identified as one of the personnel and requested that he complete the questionnaire. Mrs Dingwall assisted him to do so. The document is in evidence. Dingwall answered questions indicating that he had been a mess steward, that he had performed decontamination of "personnel, equipment, vehicles or aircraft and had visited areas signposted as radioactive". I can detect nothing in the evidence that he gave in this case to suggest that he had engaged in either of those groups of activities. 108. He indicated, by ticking appropriate boxes, that he had been issued with a film badge. This answer was clearly correct. He also indicated that he had not been required to pass through health physics check points on leaving radioactive areas. The evidence in the case does not suggest that he had, as part of his duties, entered radioactive areas giving rise to the necessity for health physics monitoring. He indicated that he had been required to undergo decontamination procedures (e.g. showers). The only evidence in the case as to this is to the effect that he, of his own volition, would shower when he felt he had been exposed to dust. There is no suggestion that he was directed to undertake this procedure or any other decontamination procedure. 109. He further indicated that he believed that he had been exposed to radiation because he had worked near a blast area, handled radioactive materials, witnessed explosions, and visited blast areas. The evidence given in this case supports none of those contentions, other than the witnessing of explosions from Observation Hill. 110. He described his health over the last few years as being very poor in comparison to others of his age and that he had been prevented from doing the kinds of things other people of his age did "most of the time". He also indicated that during the last few years his health had worried or concerned him "all of the time". I can find no justification in the evidence for such extreme assertions. 111. In relation to inquiries about major illnesses, he indicated that his first major illness was chronic asthma and hypertension diagnosed in 1966/67 by Army doctors. His second major illness was recurrent anaemia - unidentified cause - diagnosed in 1960 as shown in Army medical records. The third major illness was slight stroke and myocardial ischaemia causing temporary blindness diagnosed by Dr Packham in 1971. The fourth illness was ulcerative rhinitis diagnosed by Dr Raikundalia on reference from Dr Calnan and, fifthly and finally, a complete degeneration of all intervertebral discs L2/S1 diagnosed by Dr Calnan and a radiologist. 112. It may be noted, in the first place, that no claim was made for any psychiatric disturbance, anxiety, depression, intrusive flashbacks or the like. Secondly, the information supplied could have suggested that Dingwall was possibly suffering from the effects of exposure to radiation. 113. In these circumstances, it is not surprising that Dingwall received a follow-up telephone call from Dr Lloyd of the Commonwealth Department of Health. The contents of the conversation have not been given with any specificity. I am prepared to assume that Dr Lloyd made sympathetic comments and suggested that Dingwall make a claim for compensation under the (then) Commonwealth Employees' Compensation Act 1930 (Cth). This he did on 17 July 1983. Dingwall and Mrs Dingwall agree that, from that time onwards, Maralinga and its alleged effect upon Dingwall, became an obsession with him. He developed marked anxiety and phobic symptoms. He became severely depressed from time to time. He suffered agoraphobia and could suffer panic attacks in supermarkets unless accompanied by her. On 6 June 1984 Dr Calnan referred him to the care of a local psychiatrist, Dr Petroff, whose patient he has been ever since. Dr Petroff has given evidence that Dingwall suffers from an anxiety state. It is accepted by the respondent, as I have already indicated, that this is so. 114. On 9 September 1986 Dingwall was interviewed by two members of staff from ComCare and a statement was taken from him. This statement was presumably used in the determination of his compensation claim. The consideration of the claim was assisted by a document described as a "case summary" which has been placed in evidence. This document refers to a number of matters and includes a summary of a report obtained from Dr Petroff on 24 October 1984. Although it is lengthy, I consider it useful to include it in these reasons. It reads as follows:- "1 Claim submitted on 27 November 1983 in respect of 22 conditions which are attributed to exposure to radiation whilst serving at Maralinga. 2 Conditions listed are: (a) myocardial ischaemia (b) thrombosis behind right eye (c) temporary loss of vision (d) depression (e) asthma (f) epistaxis (g) anaemia (h) hypertension (i) deafness (j) sinusitis (k) hiatus hernia (l) loss of both cartileges (sic) right knee (m) moodiness (n) irritability (o) loss of memory and concentration (p) bouts of hyperactivity (q) bouts of lethargy (r) curvature of spine (s) impotency (last 3 years) (t) massive calcium deficiency 3 Department of Defence had confirmed claimant's service at Maralinga with MRSU from 11 July 1957 to 10 December 1957. 4 Claimant's duties as a mess steward included 'multiple visits made to bomb sites on the occasion of three atomic blasts from a couple of days after each occurrence for the purpose of providing refreshment for scientists and other army personnel observing and resting there - several times daily. No protective clothing was issued. Normal army uniform was worn with the addition of a Kodak disc. My disc, at one time, changed colour, indicating radioactivity. This was reported at RAP Maralinga and simply replaced by another. The original being surrendered. My immediate superior who accompanied by to the sites - Cpl Matt Henry (sic) - is now deceased'. The claimant further states that 'in addition, our permanent living quarters were mainly under canvas at Roadside, approximately nine miles from the sites. We were continually covered with dust, which was presumably, on occasion, carried from the sites by wind changes'. 5 The claimant's name is on list of personnel at the UK programme and also on Defence lists but does not record a radiation dose. 6 During the period Mr Dingwall was at Maralinga the Operation Antler tests were carried out, ie 14 and 25 September 1957 and 9 October 1957. There were also a number of minor trials carried out during the period Mr Dingwall was stationed in the area. 7 The Report of the Royal Commission indicates that Operation Antler was the best planned and organised of all the tests and adequate precautions were taken to protect the personnel involved. Medical Evidence 8 Service medical documents indicate that Mr Dingwall suffered from chronic obstructive airways disease, hypertension, obesity, hearing loss, right knee injury and epigastric pain. There are also references to absences due to anxiety on 10 May 1960 and 15 November 1962. The former occurred after the findings into an investigation into his right knee injury were released and the latter occurred following his failure to attain the rank of corporal. 9 As a result of these conditions, Mr Dingwall was discharged medically unfit from the Army on 19 April 1968. He was assessed to be 40% unfit for civil employment - general labouring work. 10. Dr I Petroff states in his report of 24 October 1984 that Mr Dingwall consulted him for treatment of an anxiety state on 21 June 1984 and 27 September 1984. Dr Petroff considers that Mr Dingwall suffers from an anxiety state with symptoms of moderate severity. Mr Dingwall's presence at Maralinga at the time of the atomic tests combined with the apparent cover up and loss of his hospital notes, enquiries by Government officials into his experiences at Maralinga and finding that 50-70 people who were there are now dead have all contributed to his anxiety state. 11 At interview in September 1986 Mr Dingwall was asked whether any other elements of his defence service may have contributed to his condition(s). With the exception of his knee condition and deafness he maintained that all the other conditions, including his anxiety/depression were linked to his time at Maralinga. He attributed his current depressive state to the publicity arising from the investigations by the Royal Commission into the Atomic Tests and the knowledge that a number of his contemporaries who worked at Maralinga have subsequently died. In view of the two recorded anxiety state episodes in 1960 and 1962 (prior to the publicity) Mr Dingwall was questioned as to possible causes. He again related these episodes to Maralinga this time stating that eighteen months to two years after he had left Maralinga he found out that a few of his colleagues had died of cancer or suicide." 115. Dingwall received determinations in his favour in respect of hearing loss and knee injury on the basis that these arose from his Army service, not service at Maralinga. All other claims for physical conditions were disallowed. However, he received a determination in his favour to the effect that he had anxiety state contributed to by his employment - army service at Maralinga, back dated to 5/11/81. 116. This last determination was made the subject of appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. There was a hearing in March 1988 at which both Dingwall and Mrs Dingwall gave evidence. On 22 April 1988 the Tribunal set the determination aside. 117. These present proceedings were commenced by Dingwall in 24 November 1988. It is apparent from Dr Petroff's report, notes, and evidence that he has regarded Dingwall's engagement in all these litigious endeavours as being detrimental to his emotional health. He has advised against them. It is clear that, in his view, Dingwall's obsession with Maralinga and his cases has exacerbated his anxiety state and phobias and has militated against their successful treatment. 118. The necessary preparation of both sides for trial has involved Dingwall in submitting to many examinations by psychiatrists and psychologists, in addition to those undertaken in 1988 in relation to his claim for Commonwealth compensation. The majority of these took place in October and November 1992, with the result that in those months, Dingwall became a fairly constant object of attention of the medical profession. It is obvious that Dr Petroff regarded this as detrimental. He took the view that Dingwall, whom he regarded as having pronounced narcissistic traits in any event, was seeing himself as "the star of a big inquiry". I should say that Dingwall, in the witness box, at least to some extent, gave me the same impression. Clearly, Dr Petroff also saw Dingwall as being extremely suggestible and likely to embrace ideas which accommodated to that starring role. I also formed this impression. Diagnosis of "PTSD" 119. Earlier in these reasons, I indicated the categories of psychiatric disorder which have been the subject of debate as being appropriate diagnoses of Dingwall's present condition. The diagnosis of PTSD, as a chronic condition, is the one most favourable to Dingwall. It would also have the advantage, if established, of fitting, without legal argument, into the category of "nervous shock", known to the law. 120. I have read and heard a truly daunting amount of expert testimony on the subject of this diagnostic category. It is a diagnostic label of fairly recent origin. It certainly did not exist as such in 1957, although evidence in the case indicates that similar conditions had in the past been diagnosed under nomenclature such as "shell shock" or "war neurosis". There is even dispute amongst psychiatrists as to whether it should exist as a separate category and not be regarded simply as a type of anxiety state. It would obviously be both unproductive and inappropriate for me to seek to solve disputes which are currently occurring at a scientific level. I can accept for present purposes that it is scientifically established that a severe traumatic experience can produce serious and ongoing psychological consequences to the person who has experienced it. Indeed, the law itself has long recognised this fact in well known cases (e.g. Bourhill v Young (1943) AC 110; Hambrook v Stokes (1925) 1 KB 141; Owens v Liverpool Corporation (1939) 1 KB 394). 121. Whilst I have been given to understand in the evidence that the current formulation of the elements of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is likely to undergo change in the near future, it is nevertheless convenient to have regard to the elements of this disorder, as postulated by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association (DSMIII). These have been conveniently expounded in the report provided by the witness Gregory Hampton as follows:- "In order to meet the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association (DSMIII) criteria for PTSD, Mr Dingwall would need: . to have been exposed to an extreme stressor outside the range of usual human experience; . to have re experienced the events through either recurrent and intrusive recollections, distressing dreams, or sudden acting or feeling as if the traumatic event were recurring; or experienced intense psychological distress at exposure to events that serve as reminders of the traumatic event; . to avoid stimuli associated with the trauma as indicated by three of the following: . efforts to avoid thought or feelings associated with the trauma; . efforts to avoid activities or situations that arouse recollections of the trauma; . diminished interest in significant activities; . feelings of detachment; . restricted range of affect; . numbing of general responsiveness; . sense of foreshortened future; . to be suffering symptoms of increased arousal such as hyper vigilance, sleep disturbance and difficulties concentrating." 122. The scientific literature tendered in the case makes it plain that the nature of the "stressor" is the subject of current debate. Should the extent and impact of it be determined purely by objective standards or should account be taken in this determination of the particular susceptibilities of the person experiencing it? An experience may be extraordinarily stressful to one person because of peculiarities of background, experience, emotional make-up and the like, whilst it may not be particularly stressful to another not having these peculiarities. I gather that these problems are to be resolved by a committee decision before the publication of the fourth version of the manual. It would be inappropriate for me to seek to make any contribution to this debate which, as Dr Ellard pointed out in evidence, is beginning to take on the appearance of medieval scholasticism. It is, happily, unnecessary for me to do so for the purpose of considering whether it has been established in the case that Dingwall has suffered PTSD as a result of his service at Maralinga. I can focus for the most part on the second requirement of "recurrent and intrusive recollections and distressing dreams or reminders". This is the area of nightmares and "flashbacks". It is clear that these symptoms are generally regarded as being essential to a diagnosis of PTSD. 123. So far as the external stressor is concerned, I am prepared to accept, for the purposes of this case, that the witnessing of an atomic explosion, coupled with severe fear of radiation damage inflicted directly by the explosion itself, or indirectly from radioactive fallout material could, in some circumstances, amount to exposure to an "extreme stressor" within the accepted definition of PTSD. The real question for me is whether I am satisfied, on the whole of the evidence, that Dingwall has been afflicted with the recurrent psychologically distressing and incapacitating experiences involved in intrusive recall, flashbacks and nightmarish dreams. 124. In arriving at a determination as to whether Dingwall has suffered PTSD, it is also appropriate to consider whether he has displayed any of the "avoidance" signs referred to, or suffered any of the symptoms of "increased arousal". 125. In recounting the background facts of the matter, I have already dealt with a number of occasions on which it might have been expected that Dingwall would have complained of essential PTSD symptoms but failed to do so. I must now make reference to other matters bearing upon this question. 126. In his evidence, Dingwall gave fairly detailed accounts of both nightmare and flashback experiences occurring soon after his witnessing of the explosions and continuing up to the time of the hearing, to an extent which could properly be described as recurrent. If his evidence, in this regard, is to be accepted, then, even Dr Shand, an eminent and experienced psychiatrist called by the respondent, who explained all Dingwall's problems in terms of a genetic personality disorder, would have accepted that Dingwall could have qualified for a diagnosis of PTSD. 127. There is no doubt that Dingwall, in his evidence, made a significant feature of nightmares and flashbacks. He said that he had nightmares every second night whilst at Maralinga and with similar regularity at Duntroon. The content of the nightmares was the explosion of the bomb and was accompanied by feelings of anxiety and guilt. At Duntroon he had regular flashback experiences during the day. He would be disoriented for a couple of minutes, during which time he would, in his mind, be back at Maralinga with the bomb and be, for practical purposes, unaware of his surroundings. After such episodes, he would sometimes feel nauseous and would, in fact, on occasions vomit. The vomiting would sometimes be of blood. He stated that he reported the episodes to doctors at Duntroon and also at RGH Concord. 128. At Ingleburn, he was still getting these flashbacks but not to the same extent. At Randwick the nightmares and flashbacks "got worse actually". They continued in New Guinea and he reported the fact, he said, to the doctor at the Port Moresby General Hospital. 129. Dingwall said that the problem was still experienced in 1967, when he was stationed at Wagga Wagga, having returned from New Guinea after his severe asthma attack. After discharge from the Army he continued to suffer flashbacks whilst seeking to operate the business at Maroubra. He had the same problem, together with nightmares, whilst working on the Indian Pacific. He had flashbacks at Boddington Hospital whilst he was working alone. There is no reference to the problem during the period at Port Macquarie but he alleges that he experienced flashbacks at Ballina. Furthermore, he says that he reported these matters to Dr Petroff, who has treated him since 1984. I am quite satisfied from Dr Petroff's evidence and his notes that no such report was ever made. If it had been, it would have been a matter of very considerable significance to the doctor who, in fact, was of the opinion that Dingwall was not suffering from PTSD. In my view, this is a highly significant matter and, in itself, casts considerable doubt upon the accuracy and reliability of Dingwall's evidence in relation to these necessary symptoms of PTSD. 130. I have already referred to what I regard as another highly significant piece of evidence: namely, that no report of flashback or nightmare was made to Dr Greenberg in 1969 and that he, in fact, made a record to the effect that Dingwall was not suffering from nightmares. 131. Dr Grainger-Smith, who had Dingwall as a patient after his return from New Guinea and to whom Dingwall alleges that he reported his Maralinga problems, including nightmares and flashbacks, is quite specific that, as a psychiatrist, he would have been interested in such a report and noted it. He did not do so. I found Dingwall's evidence on the topic, which I have set out above, to be quite unsatisfactory, both in its content and in the manner of its giving. 132. Additionally, there is no record in what is an extensive Army medical file of the reporting of any such problems. Neither Dr Packham, Dingwall's general practitioner, neighbour and friend from 1971 to 1977, nor Dr Calnan, his general practitioner and friend since 1981, have recorded any reference to any such complaints over the long periods in which they had Dingwall as a patient. 133. It must be borne in mind that the symptoms under discussion are not mere errant, unbidden recollections or hazy dreams. They are emotionally charged and highly distressing experiences symptomatic of psychiatric disorder. They would quite clearly be matters of concern to anyone experiencing them and an eminently fit subject to be reported to that person's treating medical practitioner whether general practitioner of psychiatrist. It is therefore, in my view, of great significance that, as I have found, no reports were made of these matters to any medical practitioners until Dingwall was involved in the series of medical examinations late in 1992, which were held for the purpose of this case. Even then, it may be noted, the assertions were not made to all such practitioners. They were not made to Dr Barclay, called on behalf of Dingwall, whose diagnosis was of an anxiety state and not of PTSD. I find Dingwall's alternating explanations in relation to this topic, that he either refrained from mentioning these matters to his medical practitioners because he was in dread of the consequences of breach of the "Secrets Act" or that he sought to mention them but was met with indifference and dismissiveness, to be totally unconvincing. The answers had, at the time of their giving, all the appearance of being convenient to the occasion. I consider that they were so and that these explanations are not worthy of credence. 134. I have not failed to take into account Mrs Dingwall's evidence that, after returning from Maralinga, Dingwall's sleeping patterns appeared to alter, in that he became restless in his sleep and at times complained of nightmares. If these nightmares were of the type relevant to a diagnosis of PTSD relating to Maralinga experiences, then I would have expected him to have said something about the content to Mrs Dingwall. The suggestion that he refrained from doing so because of obligations of secrecy, I find to be quite unacceptable. It is apparent from her evidence that Dingwall did tell her a great deal about things at Maralinga. His statements to her went beyond mere complaints of the hardships of camp life at Roadside but also included the descriptions of matters relating to the bomb. He described an object, thought to be the bomb, being transported out into the desert to ground zero without, apparently, experiencing any qualms relating to official secrecy. I cannot envisage any impediment to his describing the contents of his dreams to his wife if, in fact, they were a distressing experience and related to the atomic explosions. 135. I have mentioned Dr Petroff's evidence, to the effect that Dingwall's present condition leads to distorted recollections of past events through the operations of his depressive mood disorder, particularly his obsession with Maralinga, and his current belief that he has probably been affected by radiation. This condition makes him suggestible and ready to embrace any material appearing to support his case. A re-reading of the transcript and a recollection of the giving of the evidence indicates to me that it is extremely likely that Dingwall's descriptions of flashback experiences were coloured by this process. I note, with appropriate regret, that some questions asked by myself were leading in form and may have played a part in producing detailed evidence, which might not otherwise have been given, as to the content and duration and emotional overtones of alleged flashback experiences. 136. In this context, I should make reference to some of the results of psychometric testing performed on Dingwall. It is clear that Dr Bryant obtained some bizarre results from the administration to Dingwall of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personal Inventory ("MMPI"). I am satisfied that the results, if valid, were consistent only with Dingwall's being grossly psychotically disturbed at the time of the test. Clearly this was not so. Results on sub-scales, which were designed to ascertain whether the subject being tested was "faking bad", were quite positive. I am driven to the conclusion that when Dingwall took this test, which was being administered on behalf of the respondent, he had in mind to produce a result favourable to his case. I am satisfied that a similar conclusion can be reached in respect of a test of a similar kind administered by Mr Rees, a psychologist examining on behalf of Dingwall. 137. Finally, it must be noted that Dingwall, in giving evidence before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in his claim for Commonwealth Compensation for an anxiety state, made no mention whatever in his evidence, which otherwise would have covered much of the same ground as the evidence in this case, of any nightmare or flashback experiences. 138. Since 1983, Dingwall, through membership of the Maralinga Association and from the prominence which PTSD has acquired in the media, particularly in relation to the problems of Vietnam War Veterans, would have had ample opportunity to become acquainted with these symptoms and their significance. Moreover, his exposure to the intense round of psychiatric and psychological examinations which closely preceded the giving of his evidence, could easily have played a part in impressing upon him the significance of this symptomatology. 139. I have come to the conclusion that I should not accept his evidence as to the occurrence of these symptoms essential to a diagnosis of PTSD and must, accordingly, reject diagnosis based upon them. Accordingly, I reject his case so far as it is based upon the assertion that he suffered that disorder as a result of experiences during his service at Maralinga. Diagnosis of "Anxiety State" and Causal Connection with Maralinga 140. It is submitted on Dingwall's behalf that, even if PTSD is not established, he is entitled to a finding that he is currently suffering from a psychological disorder which may be described, in varying ways, as an anxiety state and that this condition is causally related to his Maralinga experiences. 141. As already indicated, it is conceded by the respondent that Mr Dingwall currently suffers from such a psychiatric disorder. 142. Dr Barclay, an experienced psychiatrist, examined Dingwall on 3 September 1992 and 1 October 1992. On the basis of the history he then obtained and by reference to other medical reports together with statements provided by Mr and Mrs Dingwall (which reports and statements did not refer to "flashbacks") he diagnosed Dingwall as suffering from generalised anxiety disorder, panic attacks with agoraphobia, episodic depression and alcohol abuse. He expressed the opinion that "these problems flow from Mr Dingwall's service in the Army and in particular his experiences at Maralinga. Dr Barclay summarised the information about Maralinga in the following way:- "Mr Dingwall gives a clear story of becoming anxious about the effects of the atomic explosions at Maralinga. There was a lot of fear around at the time. That fear was based on a lot of supposition and misinformation, but nonetheless it was general and Mr Dingwall suffered from it. He became worried about the development of cancer and of genetic mutations that might affect him having children. He developed some moderate anxiety symptoms at that time and was increasingly worried with each bomb explosion. He said he had unreasonable feelings of guilt about what was happening and he had one week of diarrhoea that was quite severe. His worry continued when he was moved to Duntroon. He had a lot of psychological and some physical symptoms of anxiety there and he was drinking heavily. He said that his heavy drinking would control his anxiety. He agreed however that he had been drinking more than his normal amount from the time he joined the Army." 143. Dr Barclay, as might be expected, readily conceded that, in seeking a cause for Dingwall's current psychiatric problems he was very much dependent upon the accuracy of the history he was given. In many respects, it would appear, from the history in the doctor's report, that Dingwall purported to give far greater detail of Maralinga experiences and problems than he gave in his sworn evidence. It must be remembered, also, that by the time he saw Dr Barclay, 35 years had elapsed from the events of which he sought to provide information. He had also been in the care of Dr Petroff as his treating psychiatrist since 1984 with the result that Dr Petroff, through very considerable contact with Dingwall, would no doubt have been in a better position to assess his problems and their causes. I shall refer to Dr Petroff's evidence later. 144. Dr Anthony Dinnen, another experienced psychiatrist, examined Dingwall and reported on his behalf for the purpose of the AAT proceedings in 1988. He diagnosed him as suffering from a chronic anxiety state, a condition which he said was "equally well described as being a chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder". He does not appear to have identified any specific external stressor and, in these circumstances, I think it best to regard his report as merely supporting a diagnosis of "chronic anxiety state". In making the Maralinga link he was, of course, dependent upon the history he was given. This history was given after Dingwall's "obsession with Maralinga". The doctor gave the following account in his report of 15 March 1988:- "At interview on the 1st March the patient gave a full and intelligent account, but was tense, preoccupied and at times appeared to be verging on tears. His thoughts in the main were centred on his experiences during the atomic bomb testing at Maralinga, and the experiences of the last few years which have resulted from his effort to achieve compensation. At the outset he told me that he 'was in Maralinga during the time they dropped the bombs'. He had been seeing a psychiatrist. He had been getting sicker and sicker, and eventually had been given the invalid pension. He had become increasingly worried through the years because 'all the friends I was with (at Maralinga) were dying of cancer'. He was in the Army for 13 years, in the catering section, but was retired through illness in 1968. Three atomic bombs had been exploded at Maralinga in 1957. He recalled that when he had joined the Army 'they taught us' that radiation caused cancer. He did not like being at the atomic test site. He resents the fact that senior British officials were present, relaxed and frequently with cans of beer in their hands, and that for 30 years he has been unable to say anything because of the official Secrets Act. He said: 'I just want it all brought out - the lies and the cheating - for 30 years I couldn't say anything'. He remembered an Aboriginal whom he attempted to clear from the area where the bomb was to be exploded. 'I remember this fellow with his spear and his wife and his dog and his kid - he wouldn't get in the truck - they ran off'. He had been unable to explain to the man what was about to happen. When he reported the matter he was told 'never mind'. He presumes that the family were caught in the bomb blast. They had to round up Aborigines who knew nothing about what was to happen, and he recalls that for days afterwards they would be turning up, confused and frightened, and had to be hosed down. He recalls that 'the security was that tight'. He has not seen a number of men who disappeared. He says that 'six of our own men committed suicide while we were there. One fellow threw petrol on his tent and jumped in, another went under a train'. He developed asthma, while in the Army, which he attributes to stress. He developed nervous symptoms, and became affected by this about 12 to 14 years ago. He says that four out of 20 men are still alive of the group that were required to go out on the 'forward ranges' to bring in people to safety. The patient said that some years ago 'one day out of the blue', he was contacted by Dr. Lloyd who said he was from Canberra and who asked him many questions about Maralinga. He was told to apply for compensation. As a result, 'all the tooing and froing' has worsened his nervous condition. He says that 'it's got to me'. He has been aware of being nervous since his experiences at Maralinga." 145. This passage illustrates the difficulties that exist in relating Dingwall's present condition to Maralinga experiences in any satisfactory way. In the first place, the passage indicates a degree of resentment towards the "senior British officials" which causes concern as to the objective reliability of any recollection that he gives. The reference to the "Secrets Act" and his consequent inability to say anything for 30 years, and his desire then that it be "all brought out - the lies and the cheating", is troublesome when considered in the context that he could scarcely have felt inhibited when giving evidence in his own case, in bringing out any matters which he wished to rely upon as having caused him anxiety whilst at Maralinga, and yet he failed to refer to matters which he reported to Dr Dinnen. The reference to the Aboriginals is difficult to reconcile with his evidence. The reference to Aboriginals turning up for days afterwards confused and frightened, and having to be hosed down, is not supported by his evidence at all. The reference to men disappearing and 6 committing suicide, whilst he was at Maralinga, is totally unsupported by evidence in the case. The fact that he could have said it to Dr Dinnen raises considerable doubt as to the reliability of his evidence and of the history he has given to doctors. The reference to the particular cases of suicide, totally unsupported in the evidence, causes particular concern. 146. Similar difficulties, in relation to Dingwall as an historian, emerge upon a consideration of the history he apparently gave to Dr Dent who diagnosed Dingwall as suffering from PTSD. He saw Dingwall on 27 October 1992 for two hours. He told Dr Dent that he thought he had been sent to Maralinga for punishment and that "we were living in tents the whole time and there were other blokes there who were also sent as a punishment". He gives no evidence of this at all. He told Dr Dent that after witnessing the first explosion, "thereafter I would get these nightmares every night I was there and in the daytime - any red ball and any red colour now will make me anxious and jumpy (agitated)". He said that he would "drink and drink to stop this, 10 or 12 schooners a day for 15 years and sometimes vodka". He said that, if he drank, he "wouldn't get the nightmares as bad". He further told the doctor "I used to get palpitations ever since 1958. I just became a bundle of nerves - I'd be as anxious as hell at any explosions thereafter". In relation to anxiety at Maralinga he said "when I was looking into the red glow of the cooker (at Maralinga) that would flash it back, I would feel terrible, tremulous and shaky", describing the colour red as a stimulus ever since that time and, of course, "big, loud explosions get to me". 147. He further told the doctor that, apparently as a continuing symptom, he even gets agitated with the sound of motors running. The doctor says in the report "when we examined this it emerged that at Maralinga all electricity was with generators and any sound now of a continuous running motor will act as stimulus to recreate a 'flashback', that is a vivid visual recapitulation of those events witnessed at Maralinga". 148. He also told the doctor, in relation to the telephone call from Rear Admiral Lloyd in 1983, that he started to think "I was being bugged, I thought this Dr Lloyd ... I thought I was being followed or photographed, about things I might have known but they thought I didn't know, I was worried what I might have said and that I could have been shot, I was too frightened to even tell my wife". He also said, apparently in relation to the same phone call, "I thought he said he was from the Health Department, he suggested I put in for compensation - I have no idea of why he rang me - that's when all the thoughts and fears started to really get to me". 149. He gave no evidence of these matters in the case. Again this must cast doubt upon his reliability as a witness or historian. Inevitably, one must contrast his reference to avoiding explosions after Maralinga with the fact that he transferred to the training battalion at Ingleburn as a weapons instructor only 6 months after finishing his duty at Maralinga. He had to qualify as a weapons instructor before undertaking this work, which would necessarily have involved him in operating fire arms and being in proximity to them when they were discharged. According to his records, he followed this occupation for more than 18 months. One can only remark that this appears to be totally inconsistent with the claim made to Dr Dent, in 1992, that he was a bundle of nerves after Maralinga and could not tolerate explosions. Indeed, during the year of his transfer to Ingleburn, he re-enlisted in the Army for a further 3 years. 150. He gives no evidence whatever of phobic reactions to running motors. The prospect of this information having been given to Dr Dent as a result of Dingwall's suggestibility cannot be discounted. Moreover, in relation to the phobic and avoiding reactions of things coloured red after Maralinga, one is inevitably driven to consider the fact that in 1972 he was active in assisting the evacuation of patients from Boddington Hospital when it was being threatened by the approach of serious bushfires. If he was in the grip of a perpetual anxiety state, based upon a psychiatric nervous reaction to explosion and fire, one would surely have expected some form of phobic or avoidant breakdown in the face of this situation. On the contrary, he appears to have had symptoms resulting from the physical exertions involved. There is certainly no indication of serious psychiatric breakdown. It must also be remembered that he was under the care of a doctor, who was a friend at this period, for a variety of physical matters and one would have expected any form of serious ongoing psychiatric disturbance to have been observed. 151. One can, indeed, detect no indication of any significant psychiatric disturbance during the period that Dingwall resided in the Blue Mountains and was in fairly constant employment. There is no medical evidence to suggest it. He does not really give evidence of it himself, although in his history to doctors at the end of 1992, he paints some picture of nervous disorder. I can, of course, only have regard to the evidence he gives before me. It does not support any significant active nervous disorder at this time. Indeed, Dingwall was undergoing periodic reviews for the purpose of his DFRDB pension. In this period, his condition was noted as being stationary and his pension maintained at the same level. During the period of residence at Port Macquarie he was examined for the purpose of the DFRDB on 20 June 1980. Prior to this examination, on 11 April 1980, Dingwall had completed and forwarded a prescribed form of personal statement in which he described his medical condition and symptoms as follows:- "Asthma - unable to cope with any stress, high blood pressure - giddiness, poor co-ordination, bad memory, intense irritability and bouts of depression (caused no doubt by many failures to obtain employment at interviews) - medical history and age barrier - no government jobs possibly owing to medical history." (There was also reference to cholesterol problems and the necessity for a strict diet and blood tests.) 152. Dingwall was examined by the Commonwealth Medical Officer at Port Macquarie, Dr Sork, who, amongst other matters, reported as follows:- "Appearance suggests depressive state - mild generalised tremor ... Depressive state increasing - resents present unemployment - marital discord." 153. Dr Sork further reported that:- "This man's depression is now complicated by resentment at employment situation - admits attitude to wife is causing marital discord in turn aggravating mental attitude. I feel that his depression, resentment and feeling of inadequacy will increase with duration of unemployment." 154. It also appears that, in evidence before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, his depression in this period was attributed to disappointment in relation to employment. 155. It must be noted that no complaint appears to have been made about anxiety symptoms relating to recollections of Maralinga or concerns as to events occurring during his period of service there. 156. After the move to Ballina in October 1980, as already indicated, Dingwall came under the care of Dr Calnan, who assisted him in his application for an invalid pension. 157. I can see no indication of anything in the evidence, including the medical records tendered, which would indicate any assertion on the part of Dingwall, or any consequent investigation by medical practitioners, as to an anxiety or depressive state related to service at Maralinga, as opposed to a reaction to his current situation of physical disability and unemployment. It should be noted that he had suffered very considerable back trouble and this featured largely in his application for an invalid pension. This would no doubt have contributed to his emotional state. 158. It simply cannot be ignored that no attribution of his problems to Maralinga occurred before he received the health questionnaire in October 1982 and had the telephone conversation with Dr Lloyd in April 1983. In July 1983 he lodged the Compensation Application, to which reference has already been made, in which he attributed all his woes, including his depression, to service at Maralinga. I cannot but regard this as the outward manifestation of an obsession about Maralinga, which seems to have taken over his life from that point of time. As already indicated, his psychiatric condition deteriorated to the point that Dr Calnan referred him to Dr Petroff for psychiatric help on 6 June 1984. In a report written in 1987, Dr Calnan referred to this matter saying that "he has been treated by Dr I Petroff for his severe anxiety state and depression revolving around his fears about Maralinga ... His anxiety-depression related to his obsession about Maralinga." 159. As Dr Petroff has been the treating psychiatrist since that time, his evidence must, in my view, be accorded considerable weight. 160. In his report of 24 October 1984 Dr Petroff made the following observations:- "Mr. Dingwall complained of 'nerves starting to go five years ago'. He claims that he was becoming increasingly irritable, couldn't take a joke, and was bordering on being violent. He describes himself as being uptight and being pre-occupied that he had something seriously wrong with him. He reported that the way he felt was interfering with his marital relationship in that he was fighting with his wife over nothing, became morbid which upset the wife and she found it hard to take. He complained of waking at 2.00am and having a bad night every night even though only occasionally he would have a nightmare. With his activities he tended to get bored very quickly, and found it hard to settle. He described having to do things in a rush or else he would lose interest. The patient does relax fishing which he does three or four times a week, as well as gardening and running an aviary. The setting is of a man who claimed that at Maralinga he was in charge of the food section and was exposed to atomic radiation. Sixteen years ago in 1968, he developed asthma and was thoroughly investigated in an Army Hospital at Ingleburn. He was discharged from the Army as medically unfit in 1970. He subsequently found that his Hospital notes were missing from Maralinga and again from Concord and this, together with Government officials phoning him up from Canberra about his experiences at Maralinga, as well as rumours flying around that most of the people with whom he had worked were now dead, have all contributed to his pre-occupations and made him suspicious of his own future. The knowledge that his father died at the age of 52 and that his brother also died of cancer at the age of 52, have tended to worry him as he approached that age. The recent news surrounding the atomic testing at Maralinga have fascinated him and the thought of starring in an Inquiry and going down as a martyr has appealed to him, considering that at this point of time he was leading a fairly dull and unimportant existence. The patient is taking 1/2 of 30mg. Tablet of Serapax at night. On examination Mr. Dingwall was a large man who was particular about his appearance. The patient did look tremulous and anxious, and was at pains to control and hide his anxiety. The patient did not lack insight and on the one hand realised that the more he dwelt on his symptoms, read and heard about the atomic tests, the more crippled he was becoming, yet on the other hand he found it hard to get on with the job of enjoying himself in his retirement particularly for a person who had been a fairly big 'wheel' with Qantas and was now facing anonymity in retirement. There was a large element of wanting to star in a big Inquiry and going down as a martyr. Opinion: This man suffers from an anxiety state with symptoms of moderate severity. His presence at Maralinga at the time of the atomic tests, the apparent cover up and the loss of his Hospital notes, inquiries by Government officials into his experiences at Maralinga, learning that 50 to 70 people who were there are now dead from cancer, the recent Inquiry, and of course, being under-occupied, have all contributed to his anxiety state." 161. Dr Petroff had reported in similar vein to Dr Calnan on 23 July 1984. He included the observation that "I am not an expert on radiation sickness but it seems fairly certain that his experience at Maralinga did not produce that but we can be equally certain that Maralinga did give him a roaring anxiety state". 162. This is a significant observation but it is necessary to evaluate it in the context of the whole of Dr Petroff's evidence. Dr Petroff also answered a questionnaire provided to him by the Commonwealth Employees' Compensation Authorities. The questions and answers read as follows:- "1 From what mental condition, if any, did/does Mr Dingwall suffer? Anxiety State with symptoms of moderate severity against a background of narcissistic personality. 2 Are the conditions of irritability, moodiness, loss of memory and concentration, bouts of hyperactivity and bouts of lethargy elements of the overall psychiatric condition (if any) suffered by Mr Dingwall? YES 3 If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative, that is, if Mr Dingwall did/does suffer from a mental condition, would he still have suffered from that condition had he not worked at Maralinga? PROBABLY NOT 4 If yes, would his work in the service in general have contributed to his condition? I DON'T KNOW. MOST OF HIS ANXIETIES RELATE TO THE EXPERIENCE OF POSSIBLE EXPOSURE TO RADIATION. 5 Did his work (a) at Maralinga and (b) in the Defence Force generally, contribute to, magnify or aggravate any underlying condition or pre-existing personality disorder? YES. ALTHOUGH THE EXTENT OF HIS NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY PRIOR TO MARILINGA (sic) IS HARD TO DETERMINE. 6 (a) Does Mr Dingwall fear development of other illnesses through his involvement with Maralinga? (b) Is that fear causing or contributing to his mental condition? (c) Has this fear arisen solely because of the publicity surrounding Maralinga (and the belief that his conditions are therefore compensable)? (a) YES. (b) YES (c) NOT SOLELY BUT HE IS CERTAINLY AWARE OF THE BENEFITS OF COMPENSATION 7 What work restrictions would you impose solely as a result of the mental condition suffered by Mr Dingwall? MR. DINGWALL SEES HIMSELF IN A SICK ROLE OR AT LEAST, IN THE ROLE OF A RETIREE. IF HOWEVER, HE WAS MOTIVATED TO WORK, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT HE HAVE LIGHT DUTIES WITH LITTLE RESPONSIBILITIES. 8 What treatment is recommended? CONTINUATION OF PRESENT GENERAL SUPPORTIVE MEASURES - COUNSELLING, MINOR TRANQUILLIZERS, VENTILATION, REASSURANCE." 163. Again, it is necessary to evaluate these observations in light of the whole of Dr Petroff's evidence. 164. On 30 November 1992 Dr Petroff reported to Dingwall's solicitors in the following terms:- "Thank you for your letter dated 23rd November, 1992 about Wesley Dingwall and for your continued interest in this likeable but unfortunate man. I have perused the reports of other experts but unfortunately cannot improve on my report dated the 24th October, 1984. As regards your specific requests I can only make the following observations. In recent years the fight with the Commonwealth Government has been the main focus of Wesley's life and while it has given him structure and meaning it has also been his greatest source of stress and anxiety and a noxious influence on his life. It is untrue and unkind to state that Wesley is after the money and more accurately is obsessed with 'getting the bastards' and himself starring in the process. My major concern all along has been the unhealthy aspect of this preoccupation and hence my attempts to dissuade him from embarking on the litigation process. This would explain a lot of my comments that you draw my attention to and also my frustration with Wesley's persistence with the course of action. Mr. Dingwall's clinical progress fluctuated and this was largely influenced by the progress in the litigation process and how many doctors he had to see etc. etc. Mr. Dingwall is a most pleasant and intelligent man who however has a great ability to distort things. My comment 'one fantastic story after another' refers to the time when a group of Chinese were lost in the north west of Australia and Wesley told me that they had eaten each other. In an effort to preserve my relationship with this most deserving patient I often used my notes for the purpose of catharsis rather than expose him to a destructive confrontation." 165. The comments and notes to which the doctor refers are brief notes made by him during his treatment of Dingwall. On occasions these notes record the doctor's irritation at the litigious course being persisted in by Dingwall. The notes which are in evidence do tend to illustrate a mounting obsession on the part of Dingwall with Maralinga and litigation as the years went by. 166. It is quite clear that Dr Petroff regarded Dingwall as suffering from an anxiety state when he first examined him. Apart from what he was told by way of history, he was able to observe necessary physiological symptoms indicating the presence of active anxiety. He was not merely expressing concern about things in the past, he was clearly experiencing disabling anxiety to a degree which led to the diagnosis of a psychiatric condition requiring treatment. Dr Petroff did not budge from his diagnosis in the course of his lengthy oral evidence, although it is plain that he was unaware that, at the time when Dingwall first saw him, he had already embarked upon litigation in which he was claiming that he had suffered permanent psychological harm at Maralinga. It must be remembered, also, that the respondent does not dispute that Dingwall suffers from a genuine psychiatric disorder. The extent to which, if at all, Dr Petroff attributes Dingwall's present state to any experiences suffered at Maralinga is not entirely easy to determine. It is necessary to set out certain passages from his evidence. 167. In his evidence in chief he was asked the following questions and gave the following answers:- "MR WILKINS: Doctor, you have diagnosed him in the first two of those documents as suffering from an anxiety state. Can you give some example of how that anxiety state started and how it continued?---What I thought the origin of it was? Yes?---All right. I though that he - from the history that I obtained from Wesley at that time it appeared that he has not been well for something - since 68, since essentially leaving the Army and his anxiety symptoms really started at the time that he completely retired from work and obtained an invalid pension and that he became hypochondriacal, he developed a wide variety of neurotic symptoms, one of the predominant ones was hypochondriasis where he thought he had cancer and had investigations and started to dwell and think about the Maralinga days and what foolish things he exposed himself - how he foolishly had exposed himself to this, that and the other; how he developed panic attacks, he became a bit agoraphobic, he tended to become depressed and from - then there was a series of finding out that his notes had been lost, that so many people had died and all the atmosphere of the hysteria of Maralinga started to pop up and I think exaggerated his state. He was convinced he was going to die, his father died, his brother died at the age of 52. So all these factors added to produce an anxiety state with symptoms of at least moderate severity. Doctor, when you first saw him or in the two years after that did he give you any history of suffering symptoms of anxiety or depression while he was still in the Army?---No. Would you be assisted if you were told that on various occasions, starting in 1958 and going on through 1960, 1961, 1962 and 1966 he was hospitalised for such symptoms?---That may be so, yes. Would that help you in coming to a conclusion that his symptoms started at least at some time in the Army or do you think that they were self- limiting episodes?---I don't think you need them, you could view them as a feature of his personality or a feature of his vulnerability and maybe nothing to do with necessarily Maralinga itself. It could be, of course, be part of Maralinga - that's what is smouldering there - and completely emerges on his retirement." 168. The doctor gave, as an example of this "smouldering", the case of a Vietnam veteran who developed a catastrophic panic attack when something in his family life reminded him dramatically of a Vietnam incident of which he was deeply ashamed and which he had succeeded in repressing from consciousness. 169. Dr Petroff expressed the view that Dingwall "just got caught up in the atmosphere and hysteria of litigation". He said "here is a guy who sees me in '84, gradually gets better and then from '87 onwards he starts getting worse; he won't listen to what I tell him; who pursues the Holy Grail of litigation and so on, rather than abandoning it". The doctor was asked whether he saw Dingwall as being motivated by financial gain or some other secondary gain involved in his interest in the litigation. The doctor replied:- "Right. I think revenge is - of that aspect of his condition I think revenge is probably the major one, right, that he's been mucked around by the bastards, and so on, right, who phoned him up and upset him and withheld information from him and his whole life has just been on hold. He can't even go to his mother's funeral of something because there might be an important phone call come. Can't go opal mining, or fossicking and so on, you know. He's - and the further it went on the further trapped and the further he realised that what I was saying might have been right and he's taken the foolish option of going for it." 170. The doctor, when asked about Dingwall's apparent conviction that the hospital notes, relating to his admission to the Maralinga Hospital, had been removed or destroyed, said that there was "a touch of paranoia" about that, not a psychotic manifestation but a product of anxiety which would diminish as the anxiety itself decreased. 171. When asked about the 1970 episode, when Dingwall was hospitalised by Dr Ellard, he indicated that he had not been previously made aware of that episode by Dingwall or anybody else. When asked what significance he attached to it, he said "well, you can either take it as a symptom of this sort of vulnerability of his personality or else that it's some sort of hangover from Maralinga". He said that he preferred the former view. Dr Petroff was asked whether, in his view, Dingwall had a drinking problem. He said that he did not have one now, but that he was claiming that he was drinking more than he in fact was. This was confirmed by a liver function test. The reason for this exaggerated claim was that Dingwall was "really getting into the invalid role" after 1987. In relation to the "invalid role" he gave the following evidence:- "HIS HONOUR: What, look what has happened to me, I have been turned into a drinker?---Exactly. That sort of thing?---Yes. There is no doubt in my mind that the guy had a genuine anxiety state pure and simple as a result of whatever happened that sort of brought back those memories of his foolishness during Maralinga days and that would have been from 79 till 84, till 86 or so. I think after that the theatre took over, the whole atmosphere and litigation and that's coloured and there's been an exaggeration of symptoms and so on." 172. In relation to the "Maralinga hysteria", the doctor advanced the opinion that Dingwall had "split off", a psychiatric term meaning "just gone off on a tangent, dissociated, exaggerated to the nth degree". "Personality Disorder" 173. The doctor expressed the view that Dingwall had "a personality disorder". When asked to define this psychiatric term he gave the following evidence:- "Well, we know what ugliness is, right, in terms of physical things, and I'm sure if you had a statistician he could measure somebody's nose and something that is to standard deviation in length away from the mean one way or the other, so you have got no nose at all or a huge nose. People will sort of look at you and say you're ugly. It's much harder in psychiatry but you've still got things like aggression or pacivity or obsessionals - somebody who's pedantic and correct and so on - so constipated they can't get anything done. So that it refers again - it's very hard to measure and you've just got to do it by the seat of your pants to make an assessment of these distortions of these features. So, somebody might be so dependent as to be inadequate, he's so keen to please everybody that he's got no integrity at all. Or somebody is so independent that it doesn't - he's a psychopath, he gives no caring for anybody - right. So, that's - a personality disorder is a distortion of one's underlying characteristics - of various features - right. HIS HONOUR: Well, is really no more than a descriptive label - - -?--- It's a descriptive label. - - - of a complex of symptoms and signs - - -?---That's right. - - - you observe?---That's right, its a description of a trait. Wesley's would be his propensity to conveniently take notice or conveniently ignore. Okay? So that exclude all evidence to the contrary or include all evidence to whatever he is, so he tends to split of, he tends to dissociate, which is just convenient forgetting or convenient remembering as it were." 174. The doctor went on to say that such a diagnosis meant "that the problem has been there for many years...and it's been probably from birth...plus early childhood experiences rather than other traumatic events and so on". He made it clear that "a personality disorder" involved a genetic problem influencing personality development, with a further contribution from "early rearing experiences". In this regard, I asked him the following question and received the following answer:- "What happens, what does that mean in terms of cause and effect situations in later life? Well, putting it this way, in terms of this case if I were to accept that he had unfortunate experiences at Maralinga, would they be experiences that would operate upon a personality which was vulnerable because it had some genetic defects?--- That's right. His tendency to conveniently include or conveniently exclude certain factors would make him vulnerable so that he would only see - I mean, when he was swanning around serving drinks to the officers he would have conveniently forgot all the dangers, etcetera, etcetera, and 20 or whatever - how many years down the track he would conveniently forget all the other bits and remember all the - it would flash back to him all his stupidity and all of how he exposed himself to danger." 175. Later, the doctor said in relation to Dingwall's "personality disorder":- "...whether Wesley has a personality disorder - I mean I'd probably retract that now and see it that he's got some unfortunate personality traits. Whether it actually, you know, adds up to a real disorder, you know, I don't think he's that sort of ugly as it were in psychological terms to justify a - - - MR McCARTHY: A what?---A firm diagnosis of personality disorder. I mean he's a bit narcissistic and he's got some traits, right. They'd be just - I'm going half-way. Well, what traits are you talking about, Doctor?---This propensity to be a bit histrionic, this propensity to dissociate, to split off, to conveniently forget or conveniently remember." 176. Dr Petroff remained in no doubt that Dingwall, when first seen by him, had a genuine anxiety state which "was really brought on by becoming less active, being retired and bringing back memories of the Maralinga experience". He said "that seemed to disincubate...he started to dwell and think about the foolishness of how he had exposed himself in the past...he was genuinely convinced he was going to die...or develop cancer as a result and that this was related to his Maralinga experiences". The doctor further said that this was "maximised by all the other unfortunate things that started to then happen: a phone call from Dr Lloyd... and a few other things, finding out that other people were dying and his notes missing, etcetera. He became convinced. I mean, he just really split off and distorted things and believed that there was a giant conspiracy, that he was about to die". 177. He gave further evidence of the "narcissistic" problems in Dingwall's personality, which he agreed was well established before he saw him. 178. The doctor went on to say that there was "no way I would have seen him in '84 had it not been for Maralinga and the link that he made". So far as the 1969 incident involving Dr Greenberg, and the 1970 incident involving Drs Lonie and Ellard, he said of the then diagnosis of personality disorder "yes, that is the way I take it. I mean, some might argue and say this is just a continuation of Maralinga, I don't think so, I think that it is his underlying personality and he develops an anxiety state in certain situations ... employment setbacks, whatever". He said that that would be so "regardless of whether he is at Maralinga or not". The doctor later said of the incident in which Dr Ellard had been involved that it was "consistent with him having a neurotic complaint in reaction to the stress of unemployment in a personality disorder individual". 179. So far as the analysis in terms of "personality disorder" is concerned I consider that, in what is lengthy and difficult evidence, the following passage best indicates the true view of the doctor:- "After he got the pension. He got the pension and he was - he started to get pre-occupied, his life wasn't structured and he just went mad, he started to dwell on all sorts of things, coincidentally his father died, all those other factors started to come so that it was in a setting of being underactive, having time to dwell on these that he lost it. MR McCARTHY: Certainly. But as well, that was - you are saying that about an individual who had well-established personality traits at that time?---Well, it's those sort of personality traits that would make him draw those associations, if he didn't have those personality traits he wouldn't have jumped to those sort of conclusions. That is right. But - - -?---He would have just gone to a GP, had a blood check and said no, you're okay, go. But those conclusions that you refer to are a product of the sort of person he was?---That's right. The personality traits that he had?---Yes. That's what I believe. And those personality traits and those matters are not related to him as a person?---Yes. Not to what happened to him at Maralinga?---That's what I believe, yes." (It is accepted that the word "not" in the second last question did not form part of it and the question was answered as though it was not there.) 180. It also appears that the doctor regarded Dingwall's personality traits as being those of an "hysteric" and that he was reacting as an hysteric, to his conduct at Maralinga and to the publicity about Maralinga and that it was in that context that he was providing information to the doctor about Maralinga. That information was "radiation oriented", relating to the way he had behaved at Maralinga: linking "the absence of sufficient information and protection against radiation" in the context of the belief that "he had something wrong with him". As I have previously indicated, Dingwall averred that he considered that he was radiation affected or at least was not convinced that this was not the position. 181. I have set out passages from Dr Petroff's evidence at length because, and I mean him no disrespect when I say this, I found it difficult to be confident, at times, that I was fully grasping his meaning. It became apparent, early in his evidence, that the statement made in his report to Dr Calnan, to the effect that Maralinga had given Dingwall "a roaring anxiety state", was a view the true meaning of which required considerable exploration. I have come to the conclusion that what Dr Petroff was conveying was an opinion that Dingwall undoubtedly was suffering from psychiatric anxiety and that the ideational content or the subject matter of that anxiety was a belief that he had suffered radiation damage at Maralinga. This belief was part of a distorted picture that he held that he had (a) been permitted to take unacceptable risks of exposure to radiation and that (b) he had been insufficiently warned or protected in relation to such risks and that (c) a conspiracy existed whereby he had been denied information about those risks and their effect upon him and that (d) records in relation to his true situation had been withheld or destroyed. 182. Obviously, anxieties about these matters, persisted in to the point or neurotic disorder, could not have existed had Dingwall not been at Maralinga during the Antler tests. So viewed, Maralinga had given Dingwall an anxiety state. However, I am satisfied that what the doctor was not conveying, in his opinion to Dr Calnan or in his evidence in this case, was that, on the history which he accepted, Dingwall had undergone experiences at Maralinga which, in themselves, produced an ongoing psychiatric disorder which, thereafter, manifested itself from time to time in clinical anxiety or depression. Importantly, in my view, he did not regard the 1969 and 1970 episodes, despite their relative proximity to Maralinga, as being Maralinga-caused. Although he mentioned the possibility of some "smouldering" problem relating to Maralinga, he obviously did not see these episodes as being some sort of a flair up of an ongoing psychiatric disorder. They were the neurotic response of a personality with some problems traits of a narcissistic, histrionic nature to a situation which had become intolerable to that personality. Although the doctor did not go into this question in great detail, it is obvious that Dingwall reacted adversely to the loss of security he had previously enjoyed in the Army, his inability to manage the business and what he saw as insubordination from an adult son. Dingwall's disordered reaction was explicable without recourse to anything occurring at Maralinga. Indeed, except in evidence which I have rejected, he has not sought to incriminate Maralinga in relation to these matters. 183. I have come to the conclusion that Dr Petroff's evidence fundamentally supports a view that Dingwall had certain personality traits, not necessarily, in themselves, amounting to a frank personality disorder, which made him vulnerable to setbacks in life which others, of different constitution, could surmount without serious difficulty. In his case, however, serious anxiety and depression can be precipitated. These mal-adaptive states would not be ongoing unless supervening matters produced them. Dingwall had had experiences at Maralinga which caused him some concern, even anxiety. This was all in the past. What caused the anxiety state, for which the doctor has been treating him for many years, was not those experiences as such but an anxiety reaction, in the first place, to unemployment which was added to by brooding over recollections of Maralinga, a state of mind largely induced by publicity about the tests, and information as to some persons having died from radiation-induced illnesses. These concerns were converted into an anxiety state by receipt of the questionnaire and the follow-up phone call from Dr Lloyd. 184. This appraisal would mean that Dr Petroff's evidence is somewhat at variance with that of Drs Shand, Champion and Bryant, each of whom appear to attribute Dingwall's condition simply to the inevitable unfolding of a genetically determined personality disorder. These doctors did not have the advantage of seeing and treating Dingwall over a long period of time. I have come to the conclusion that I should prefer Dr Petroff's analysis. 185. What I accept to be Dr Petroff's analysis is also at variance with that of Drs Barclay and Dinnen, neither of whose opinions are lightly to be dismissed. Both of these eminent practitioners espouse the view that, on the history given to them, Dingwall, through traumatic experiences suffered at Maralinga, incurred an anxiety disorder which has "smouldered", with occasional flair-ups such as shown in his Army medical records and in the episodes of 1969 and 1970 reported on by Drs Greenberg, Lonie and Ellard. The flair-ups became a major conflagration in the 1980s with the advent of the Maralinga publicity and the specific inquiries made to him by the authorities. It was, however, the one Maralinga-induced disorder all the time, the root cause being fear that he had suffered radiation damage which would bring major problems in the future. Conclusions on Causation 186. I have the not uncommon but none-the-less, invidious task of reaching a conclusion in a situation where the evidence of witnesses of equal eminence is in conflict. On a full consideration of the whole of the evidence, I have come to the following conclusions on the question of causation. The evidence of Mrs Dingwall satisfies me that she observed some changes in her husband during and after his tour of duty at Maralinga. He was nervy and moody, whereas he had not previously been so. Clearly he did not wish to go to Maralinga. I got the impression that he resented being sent there. This was something I sensed from the giving of his evidence, rather than from any specific material that he put forward. However, he had told some of the examining doctors that he felt that he was being sent there unjustly, as a form of punishment, relating to some problem with canteen finances. This matter was not explored, as I have said, in evidence before me, but he clearly had advanced this as a reason for his being sent to the tests. He obviously resented having to live in the conditions prevailing at Maralinga. He lived in a tent city whereas others were more comfortably housed at Maralinga village. He complained of heat, flies and dust to his wife. He described the living conditions as "hell on earth". He obviously drank to excess which, I am satisfied, was, to an extent a continuation of a pattern already established after he joined the Army and was living away from home. I do not consider that he had a "personality disorder" of a frank or florid kind which would have been evident before he joined the Army. He joined the Army for security. Obviously it would have been a way of life totally different from anything he had previously experienced. There would necessarily have been some stresses and strains involved in this alone. Maralinga and its conditions could well have been a blow to him, having regard to the fact, as I find, that he had narcissistic personality traits which would have led him to ask the question "why is this happening to me?". 187. There is nothing in his evidence to indicate that he suffered any severe psychic shock by being amongst those witnessing the blasts. He was not terrified by them. His real concerns, as they appear to have unfolded over the years, relate to the dust blowing around the area which he appears to have come to regard as having been potentially radioactive. I am satisfied that he took the precaution of washing himself, although not to the extent he claims. I consider that, from time to time, aided by camp gossip, he experienced some concern that he might have been exposed to radiation. I am quite satisfied, however, that these concerns were just that; they did not amount to agitation or disabling anxiety. I am not persuaded that his hospitalisation in Maralinga related to any psychological reaction occasioned by blast or dust. In fact, he does not say that it was. 188. The same comment may be made in relation to the entries in his medical records speaking of anxiety or anxiety states. I have no evidence that these had any Maralinga content whatsoever. I am quite unable to attribute to them the significance that Drs Barclay and Dinnen give them. A similar comment applies to the episodes of anxiety after leaving the Army. They can reasonably be attributed to a rigid personality meeting an intolerable life situation. This conclusion is, of course, aided by the fact that no attribution to Maralinga was made at the time. 189. In my view, Dingwall took with him from Maralinga some concerns about radiation which were of no great moment. More significant concerns were generated by reports, accurate or inaccurate, that personnel at Maralinga were contracting cancer. These concerns were obviously greatly magnified in the 1980s, to the extent, that he began to ask himself "when is my turn coming?". In this context he developed the anxiety state diagnosed and described by Dr Petroff. It must be noted, however, that he gives no evidence of having been consumed with anxiety about radiation damage after leaving Maralinga nor even that it was a recurrent severe irritant which he needed to force from his mind in order to cope with day to day living. He makes no such claim in his evidence and, quite obviously, made no such claim to the medical practitioners who were examining him on a quite regular basis in relation to his pension entitlements. 190. I am not unmindful of some of the scientific evidence placed before me to the effect that the insidious nature of radiation damage, its invisibility, and the uncertainty which attends its future onset can be productive of psychological problems in circumstances where mere exposure to an explosion may not. However, these studies relate to situations where there is a clear and acknowledged risk that radiation exposure has occurred and the victims are in the unenviable position of waiting, over what could be considerable periods of time, to see if harm has occurred. In the present case, although I am satisfied that Dingwall has come to believe that he has probably suffered radiation damage, there is no evidence to justify this belief and, indeed, his case, as presented, disclaims the possibility of any such damage. On the evidence, I can find no more than that he experienced some worries about radiation, which were of an ordinary kind, and which did not partake of psychological disturbance. I am fortified in this view by general evidence given to this effect by Dr Ellard, who clearly distinguished natural apprehension about the dangers of radiation from a state of clinical anxiety relating to them. I am not persuaded that Dingwall suffered any clinical anxiety as a result of experiences at Maralinga. 191. In these circumstances, whatever possibilities may lurk in the difficult evidence of this case, I am unable to find that Dingwall more probably than not suffered psychological harm as a result of experiences inflicted upon him at Maralinga. His case must, therefore, necessarily fail. 192. This finding renders unnecessary any decision of the equally difficult questions involved in the claim that the respondent failed in its duty of care to Dingwall. A considerable amount of evidence was directed to this question particularly in the area of foreseeability of risk of psychiatric harm from the perspective of 1957. Quite clearly the respondent would have been aware of the propensity of soldiers to suffer psychological harm in battle conditions. As the evidence emphasised, it was well-known that service personnel suffered what was described as "shell shock" in World War I and "war neurosis" or "combat fatigue" in World War II. Information from the Korean War and from the results of the atomic bombing of Japan was also available. There was also material from the atomic tests conducted in the United States and elsewhere after the second World War. Indeed, some of this material related to service personnel who could properly be described as having been used as "guinea pigs" to test the reaction of highly trained infantry to exposure to atomic warfare. It was argued on behalf of Dingwall that the existence of this material would have been sufficient, in 1957, to raise the possibility of foreseeable psychiatric harm to personnel exposed to the atomic testing in the Antler series at Maralinga. I think it undesirable that I make any definitive findings on this general topic, as the evidence may, of course, differ from case to case. 193. It is appropriate, however, that I indicate that, in my view, Dingwall would have faced considerable difficulty in relation to this issue. The previously available information, in 1957, clearly enough related to the psychological impact upon service personnel of battle conditions. These conditions necessarily carry with them all the trauma of the uncertain and the unexpected. In battle nothing is structured or predictable. Surprise and shock is an incident of warfare. There is, accordingly, a clear distinction between situations to which the respondent would necessarily have had regard and the situation at Maralinga where the testing was undertaken under controlled conditions. These controls, so far as the evidence of this case indicates, would have removed from the bomb blasts the elements of the uncertain and the unexpected present in the wartime situation. The structured situation of the large group of service personnel and scientists gathered at a sufficiently safe distance from the ground zero to await the explosion, in accordance with a preordained countdown procedure, was vastly different from warfare. One can only acknowledge the strength of the argument that the Army authorities, in the absence of any indication to the contrary, would not reasonably have been expected to foresee that the witnessing of the explosion would bring about psychological breakdown in trained Army personnel then, let alone at some point well into the future. 194. What is to be said as to the foreseeability of psychologically destructive fear engendered by subsequent exposure to dust? The evidence in this case indicates, with clarity, that an elaborate set of precautions was put in place to deal with harm which might be occasioned to personnel actually exposed to dangerous dust. Undoubtedly, as appears from the evidence of Professor Moroney, trained personnel were required to go into areas where radioactivity was expected to exist, for the purpose of measuring levels of that radioactivity, and for other purposes associated with the test procedures. Such personnel were required to follow elaborate safety procedures put in place and administered by personnel known as the Health Physics group. The procedure has been fully described by Professor Moroney. There is no need to set it out here as this is not a case in which exposure to radiation is alleged. Dingwall was employed as a mess steward. His duties were not intended to take him into radioactive areas. He was not required to wear protective clothing or undergo decontamination procedures. It is not suggested that the dust, to which he was from time to time exposed, was radioactive nor, in my view, has anything been proved in this case which should have caused those in authority to contemplate that personnel not going into designated radioactive areas might, nevertheless, be subject to erroneous perceptions that the dust encountered outside these areas might be dangerous to them. 195. In short, I would have had great difficulty, on the material before me, in reaching the conclusion that the respondent should reasonably have foreseen a risk of psychological harm to a service man performing the duties required of Dingwall. 196. Considerable difficulty would also have been encountered in achieving a favourable outcome on what is generally described as the "preventability" issue. I do not need to go into this and I refrain from doing so. 197. I do not consider, also, that it is desirable that, in these proceedings, I enter upon a consideration as to whether Dingwall's claim, as it was ultimately formulated, would necessarily have failed as not coming within the concept of a claim for "nervous shock" within the meaning of principles enunciated in Jaensch v Coffey (1984) 155 CLR 549 (see also Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (1992) 1 AC 310; Chiaverini v Hockey and Anor 1993 ATR 81-223). It was submitted on behalf of Dingwall that, should the case ultimately depend upon a finding of psychological harm, based upon fear generated by regular exposure to dust perceived to be radioactive, then, notwithstanding that individual "shocks" could not be established, nevertheless recovery would be permissible either because the concept of "nervous shock" could rationally be extended to cover such a case, or the case was distinguishable from Jaensch on the basis that the restricted view of "nervous shock" therein expounded was appropriate only in cases where harm to a claimant was indirectly caused through witnessing the initial infliction of physical injury upon another person or the immediate aftermath of it. I consider it desirable that these questions be left for a case in which they necessarily arise for determination. 198. In the result, the application is dismissed. The applicant was legally aided. I have heard no argument on costs. In these circumstances, I think it desirable that I reserve the question of costs.