Is your surname Minster?

Research the Minster family

Barry Minster, OAM's Geni Profile

Share your family tree and photos with the people you know and love

  • Build your family tree online
  • Share photos and videos
  • Smart Matching™ technology
  • Free!

Barry Edward Minster, OAM

Also Known As: "Baz", "Bazza", "Kewvet"
Birthdate:
Birthplace: St Georges HospitaL, Cotham Road, Kew, VIC, 3101, Australia
Immediate Family:

Son of Trevor Edward Leslie Minster, ED and Dulcie Dorothy Minster
Husband of Judith Ann Minster
Father of Private User and Private User
Brother of Private

Occupation: Television Engineer
Last Updated:
view all

Immediate Family

About Barry Minster, OAM

Army number: 342976 Active service - Summary of Unit Name: 110 Signal Squadron. Saigon Sth Vietnam Start Date: 02/04/1969 End Date: 29/10/1970 [576 days on active service]

Marriage #1 - 27 August 1971 Father of Zana Holbeche Minster - 15 January 1974 Divorce - 11 November 1977

Marriage #2 - 22 February 1980 Father of Nicolette Ann Vincent Minster - 17 November 1983

Awarded Medal of the Order of Australia - 26 January 2017 for service to the community - as Board member of Freemasons Board of Benevolence 2000-2011 and Freemasons Foundation 2014-2017

Last name: Minster. This very interesting surname recorded as Minster and Minister, is early medieval English.

It is either residential and describes a person who lived by a minster, as shown in the first two recordings below, or possibly in a few cases, it may have described a minister, but if so as a nickname.

This surname is first recorded in the Close Rolls for the city of London in 1261 with that of Thomas de Mynistre, and describing a man called Thomas who lived by what was then the Minster in the West, and later became the city of Westminster in its own right.

Other examples of recordings are those of Haldanus Minister of the county of Norfolk in the Hundred Rolls of landowners of 1273, and much later the recording of Thomas Minster.

He married Ellen Pritchard at St George chapel, Hanover Square, city of Westminster in 1768.

Minster and Repatriation Commission [1993] AATA 514 (2 June 1993) Last Updated: 25 August 2008

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION

VETERANS' AFFAIRS - claim for pension - whether dental caries related to war service. Rate of general pension for accepted disabilities - lumbar spondylosis, sciatic pain, sensori-neural hearing loss with tinnitus, post traumatic stress disorder. Whether veteran eligible for pension at Intermediate rate.

Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986

Bushell v Repatriation Commission [1992] HCA 47; (1992) 16 AAR 1

AAT Decision No 8751

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )

) No. V91/741

VETERANS' APPEALS DIVISION )

Re: BARRY EDWARD MINSTER

Applicant

And: REPATRIATION COMMISSION

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal: Deputy President B.M. Forrest

Mr A. Argent, Member

Brigadier C. Ermert, Member

Place: Melbourne

Date: 2 June 1993

Decision: The Tribunal decides:

a) the veteran's dental caries is not war-caused;

b) the veteran is not entitled to a pension at the Intermediate rate;

c) to remit the matter to the respondent for assessment of the general rate of pension, on the applicant submitting a current lifestyle report.

......................

Deputy President

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )

) No. V91/741

VETERANS' APPEALS DIVISION )

Re: BARRY EDWARD MINSTER

Applicant

And: REPATRIATION COMMISSION

Respondent

REASONS FOR DECISION

Deputy President B.M. Forrest

Mr A. Argent, Member

Brigadier C. Ermert, Member

This is an application by Barry Edward Minster for review of a decision by the respondent on 6 July 1990, affirmed by the Veterans' Review Board on 18 July 1991, that dental caries was not war-caused.

Mr Minster ("the veteran") was born on 4 December 1948 and served in the Australian Army from 20 January 1965 to 21 July 1971. His overseas service was in Saigon, South Vietnam, with a signals unit, from 2 April 1969 to 26 March 1970 and from 29 April 1970 to 29 October 1970.

For the purposes of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 ("the Act") the veteran had operational service. That being so, the Tribunal is required to make a finding that the veteran's dental caries was war-caused, unless the Tribunal is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt there is no sufficient ground for making that finding. The Tribunal shall be so satisfied if the material before the Tribunal does not raise a reasonable hypothesis connecting the veteran's dental caries with the circumstances of his service: s.120(1) and (3).

The most recent authoritive consideration of what constitutes a reasonable hypothesis is to be found in the High Court judgements in Bushell v Repatriation Commission [1992] HCA 47; (1992) 16 AAR 1 per Mason CJ, Deane and McHugh JJ at 5-7; Brennan J at 16-18 and Toohey J at 25.

The critical issue for the Tribunal is whether the disease of dental caries is war-caused within the meaning of s.9 of the Act. In addition, because the veteran has recently had a number of conditions accepted as war-caused disabilities, viz lumbar spondylosis, sciatic pain, sensori-neural hearing loss with tinnitus and post traumatic stress disorder, the Tribunal is to determine if the veteran is properly assessed at 70 percent of the General Rate.

The Tribunal received in evidence the documents lodged pursuant to s.37 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 and a dental report from Dr Steele, a prosthodontist. Mr De Marchi, a solicitor, appeared for the veteran and Mr Molloy, an officer of the Department of Veterans' Affairs, appeared for the respondent.

In his evidence the veteran stated he had three molars extracted sometime before his enlistment as an Army apprentice at the age of 16, another extracted before he went to Vietnam and then another extracted on his return to Australia. He went on to say in Saigon his unit did not live in Army barracks and there was no Australian Army messing arrangements. He believes some of the food he consumed in Saigon, ranging from the mushy contents of the US C ration packs to the hard Australian Army biscuits and local produce, caused wear-and-tear to his teeth and contributed to the decay.

Dr Steele, who had examined the veteran's Army dental records, said in evidence that the veteran's mouth was typical of young men at the time. The records indicated two permanent molars were missing prior to his enlistment. In October 1967, the records showed that, in addition, two premolars and one permanent molar were missing and there were nine filled teeth. In July 1970 (when the veteran was in Vietnam), another molar was extracted and in February 1971 (when the veteran was in Australia) a further molar was extracted. The records showed the veteran was dentally fit two months prior to his going to Vietnam and just before his discharge in July 1971.

Dr Steele went on to say that he could not determine what extent service in Vietnam had on the condition of the veteran's teeth, except that if there was any contribution at all, it would have been small. He added that wear-and-tear means non-decay deterioration.

In his report (Ex. B) Dr Steele stated:

"...

2. The examination of a dental patient, in terms of a life time, is rather like the scrutiny of a still frame from a movie film. In Mr Minster's case there was opportunity for a number of observations on a regular basis, over a relatively small time span, and his dental health assessments are likely to have been accurate.

3. While it is an attractive hypothesis to suggest that the spaces where teeth were missing, should have been restored with a partial denture or bridges many years ago, to avoid later occlusion (bite) problems, it is nonetheless true that such treatment was not necessarily indicated at that time. The provision of removable dentures and bridgework is not indicated for all patients and if, provided when oral health is not excellent, may induce major complications and further tooth loss.

4. It is reasonable to assume that at his last dental examination, the Dental Officer considered that Mr Minster was dentally fit, and that there were not good indications for further and more complex treatment.

5. In the years following the period of enlistment Mr Minster evidently experienced problems with his restored (filled) posterior teeth. The simple restoration of decayed teeth does not increase their strength, nor does it render them safe from further decay on other surfaces or gum disease; these problems occur in many patients.

6. The hypothesis that the consumption of hard biscuits during 18 months of service in Vietnam caused brittleness and deterioration in his teeth in later years, regrettably, cannot be supported.

Teeth with a history of decay are always prone to fracture as the structural integrity of the crown is lost, and there is research reported in referred journals which proves this."

Given the veteran's dental condition prior to his enlisting and operational service, the relatively short time of his life spent in Vietnam and the weight of Dr Steele's evidence, the Tribunal concludes a reasonable hypothesis connecting the veteran's operational service with his dental caries is not raised. Therefore, his claim for dental caries as a war-caused disease is refused.

Turning to the assessment of the veteran's incapacity arising from his accepted disabilities, viz:

Lumbar spondylosis (previously diagnosed as lumbago)

Sciatic pain

Sensori - neural hearing loss with tinnitus

Post traumatic stress disorder

the Tribunal accepts the parties agreement to the following impairment points as set down in the Guide to the Assessment of Rates of Veterans' Pensions (3rd Edition):

Lumbar spondylosis 30 Table 3.4

Sciatic pain 10 Table 3.7

Sensori - neural hearing loss with tinnitus 10 Table 7.2

Post traumatic stress disorder 10 Table 4

The combined value is 49 points, rounded up to 50.

The Tribunal notes the veteran completed the Lifestyle Report more than 18 months ago, on 13 November 1991, and is aware that circumstances may have changed since then.

The Tribunal therefore remits the issue of assessment of the general rate of pension to the respondent, upon the applicant submitting a current lifestyle report.

Mr De Marchi argued the veteran was eligible for the Intermediate rate of pension under s.23 of the Act. The veteran's degree of incapacity arising from his accepted disabilities is 70 percent of the general rate with effect from 20 February 1992.

In his evidence, the veteran stated he ceased full-time work in October 1991 when the ABC did not renew his outside broadcast manager contract. Prior to that, over the 22 years since his discharge from the Army, he had held seven positions, all connected with the TV industry. He has, since October 1991, applied for a number of positions without success.

He now works at home, administering the family business, Visual Images Pty Ltd, in which his wife does most of the work. She works about 80 hours a week, and the business employs up to 12 casual staff. His wife arranges the contracts and does all the outside work. When he was working in the ABC, his wife ran the company. They have had the business since 1982. He said he now works about 18 hours a week, he uses an automatic drive car because he cannot operate a clutch due to his spondylosis and is on continuous medication for his back pain. He drives the car 800 metres to the post office because he could only walk there with difficulty. His office work consists of receiving and answering correspondence and telephone calls and keeping accounts. Most of the work is on a computer.

Section 23 of the Act reads: "Intermediate rate of pension

23. (1) This section applies to a veteran if -

(a) either: (i) the degree of incapacity of the veteran from war-caused injury or war-caused disease, or both, is determined under section 21A to be at least 70% or has been so determined by a determination that is in force; or

...

(c) the veteran is, by reason or incapacity from war-caused injury or war-caused disease, or both, alone, prevented from continuing to undertake remunerative work that the veteran was undertaking and is, by reason thereof, suffering a loss of salary or wages, or of earnings on his or her own account, that the veteran would not be suffering if the veteran were free from that incapacity; and

(d) section 24 or 25 does not apply to the veteran.

... (3) For the purpose of paragraph (1)(c) - (a) a veteran who is incapacitated from war-caused injury or war-caused disease, or both, to the extent set out in paragraph (1)(b) shall not be taken to be suffering a loss of salary or wages, or of earnings on his or her own account, by reason of that incapacity -(i) if the veteran has ceased to engage in remunerative work for reasons other than his or her incapacity from that war-caused injury or war-caused disease, or both;

..." In this case, the veteran is not entitled to the grant of a pension at the Intermediate rate because it is not his war-caused injuries or war-caused diseases alone that prevent him from undertaking remunerative work. It is because his contract with the ABC was not renewed and the state of the present labour market precludes him from employment The Tribunal therefore refuses his application for a pension at the Intermediate rate.