Defence Determination, Conditions of service Amendment Determination (No. 4) 2025

This instrument, the Defence Determination, Conditions of service Amendment Determination (No. 4) 2025, amends Defence Determination 2016/19, Conditions of service. It is made under section 58B of the Defence Act 1903 by the Acting Director General, People Policy and Employment Conditions (Sarah Kate McGregor), and is dated 8 April 2025. Sections 1 to 4 of the instrument commence on the day the instrument is registered; Schedules 1 to 5 commence 10 April 2025 (see Commencement table). The instrument has no explanatory memorandum or policy statement within the text beyond its formal maker and authority.

Mechanically, the instrument does four categories of change to the 2016/19 Determination:

• Targeted textual amendments and table updates to location and housing entries (Schedule 1). For example, it replaces the appointment residence name “Ashgrove” with “Enoggera” in subsection 7.6.23.3 and replaces the Adelaide table item to show Commander Air Warfare Centre at 14 Gowland Street, Broadview. It also repeals paragraph 7.8.46.1.c.

• Additions to post index, benchmark-school and hardship-location annexes (Schedule 2). It inserts new entries for Norway (Oslo) and Ukraine (Kyiv) into Annex 12.3.B, inserts Oslo International School into Annex 15.6.A, and adds several country entries (Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and an expanded Ukraine entry with multiple column values) into Annex 16.B.

• Revisions that substitute the Chief of the Defence Force (CDF) as the named decision-maker in a large number of provisions, and repeal definitions and previous decision-maker references (Schedule 3). The instrument replaces occurrences of “decision‑maker”, “a Defence Housing Australia decision‑maker” or similar phrases with “CDF” in dozens of provisions, and repeals earlier provisions that defined those decision‑makers.

• Drafting and operational clarifications across many provisions (Schedule 4). This includes (a) a substitution to the definition‑note restricting the Determination’s application to members on continuous full‑time service (s 1.3.1 note 2); (b) new procedural requirements for recognising unaccompanied resident family (application on approved form and meeting criteria in Subdivision 4); (c) explicit numerical and dimensional limits on removable items (new 6.5.10); (d) changes to temporary accommodation eligibility periods (subsection 7.5.9.3); (e) a restated rule for keeping a Service residence at a losing location (section 7.6.61); (f) amended travel reimbursement rules where travel is not by the most economical means (subsection 9.1.7.2); (g) an altered commencement rule for school/remote-location benefits (section 9.3.41); and (h) a revised formula for international travel to close relatives (paragraph 15.3.35.4.b). Schedule 4 also contains an extensive, systematic set of wording substitutions (item 16) that replace words such as “either”, “both”, “one” and “the following” with alternative quantifiers such as “any”, “all of the following” or “one of the following” across a long list of provisions.

Finally, Schedule 5 provides a narrowly framed transitional provision: where a member was on long‑term posting overseas to Ukraine between 1 April 2025 and commencement, that member is to be treated as eligible for the benefits they would have had if Schedule 2 items adding Ukraine had been in effect at the time of posting.

The instrument therefore operates by amending and replacing specific textual elements of the Conditions of service Determination, adding new locations and school entries, centralising named decision‑making references to the CDF, imposing concrete limits and procedural elements, and providing a limited transitional entitlement for specified Ukraine postings.

The instrument touches three conceptual areas within the Conditions of service Determination: location/entitlement mapping (annex/tables), allocation of decision‑making authority, and operational eligibility criteria for a range of mobility, housing and family benefits.

Location and entitlement mapping. Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 alter the mapping between posts, appointment residences and annexed lists used to compute entitlements. Insertions into Annex 12.3.B (post index locations) and Annex 16.B (hardship/location matrix) add Norway (Oslo), Ukraine (Kyiv) and multiple African countries (Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan) with particular cell values. Annex 15.6.A gains Oslo International School as a benchmark school entry. These annexes function in the Determination as lookup tables: the Determination links a posting location to specific allowance, housing, school or hardship rules by reference to the annex row. The instrument therefore modifies the universe of locations that map to specified entitlements.

Decision‑maker identity. Schedule 3 replaces numerous generic references to a “decision‑maker” or a “Defence Housing Australia decision‑maker” with “the CDF” (Chief of the Defence Force). It also repeals the prior statutory definitions of decision maker or DHA decision‑maker (Schedule 3, items 6 and 8). The practical concept affected is the locus of formal authority to make eligibility, accommodation and removal determinations: where the prior Determination referenced a decision‑maker role (a potentially delegable administrative actor or specified agency decision-maker), the instrument now names the CDF in many places. The instrument does not, in its text, restate delegation rules or administrative procedures for CDF action within the Determination itself.

Operational eligibility and limits. Schedule 4 contains new and replacement provisions that specify concrete operational tests and limits. For removals, section 6.5.10 now lists size and weight caps for boats and removal packing requirements for items such as lawn lockers and motorbikes. Temporary accommodation eligibility (7.5.9.3) is defined in temporal terms (up to 3 nights at losing location; at gaining location until furniture delivery). Section 7.6.61 lists discrete scenarios in which a member may retain a Service residence at a losing location and ties retention to service reasons, door‑to‑door removals, or the presence of unaccompanied resident family. Travel cost assessment when non‑most economical travel is used is restated in subsection 9.1.7.2 to an either/or outcome (actual cost if cheaper; capped at normal departmental liability if more expensive). Paragraph 15.3.35.4.b introduces a formula for overseas travel reimbursement that compares allowable travel costs from the posting location and from Sydney.

Primary affected persons and entities are members covered by Defence Determination 2016/19 (subject to the limitation in the amended note to section 1.3.1 that the Determination is restricted to members on continuous full‑time service, unless otherwise specified), their resident families, and Defence administrative actors responsible for housing, removals, travel and school/allowance entitlements.

Members posted to or stationed at affected locations. Additions to Annex 12.3.B and Annex 16.B change the entitlements of members posted to Norway (Oslo), Ukraine (Kyiv) and several African countries (Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan). The inserted rows in Annex 16.B include cell values that will be used by the Determination’s formulas or lookups to calculate hardship or location allowances. Members already posted to Ukraine in the specific period 1 April 2025 to commencement are expressly affected by the transitional clause in Schedule 5: those members are eligible for the benefits they would have had if the Ukraine entries had been in effect at posting. The instrument therefore directly targets members in the newly added country entries.

Members claiming school/education entitlements. Annex 15.6.A gains Oslo International School as a benchmark school entry (item 3, Schedule 2). Members with dependent students may be affected where that school is used to determine eligibility for education-related allowances or placement decisions.

Members with housing and removal entitlements. Schedule 1 amends appointment residence entries (for example changing “Ashgrove” to “Enoggera” in subsection 7.6.23.3 and updating the Adelaide table item address). Schedule 4 imposes limits on removable items (new 6.5.10), modifies temporary accommodation periods (7.5.9.3) and restates when a member can keep a Service residence at a losing location (7.6.61). Members who are relocating, keeping service residences, or claiming storage/removal costs will be directly affected.

Members with unaccompanied family arrangements. Schedule 4 adds procedural requirements for recognition of unaccompanied resident family: members must apply on an approved form and the child must meet criteria for a type of unaccompanied resident family in Subdivision 4. Schedule 4 also changes a textual reference from “has resident family” to “has unaccompanied resident family” in subsection 7.8.17A.1. Members whose families are classified unaccompanied residents will need to meet the newly formalised application requirements.

Administrative decision‑makers and Defence institutions. The substitution of “CDF” for many instances of “decision‑maker” or a DHA decision‑maker (Schedule 3) alters who is named as the decision authority in the Determination’s text. The practical administration will be affected: staff who formerly exercised decision functions under the Determination will need to work within the chain of authority now reflected in the text. The instrument also repeals the prior defined roles for decision‑maker and DHA decision‑maker (Schedule 3, item 8), which removes those specific statutory references from the Determination and replaces them with a singular institutional label.

The Determination as amended modifies both rights (entitlement to specific benefits) and the identity of persons with authority to grant or deny those rights. The instrument does not set out a new catalogue of rights beyond those in the base Determination; it alters who decides and when certain conditions are met.

Named decision authority. A central duty/authority change is that decisions required by many parts of the Determination are assigned to the CDF. Schedule 3 replaces the term “decision‑maker” and similar formulations with “CDF” in a long list of provisions (Schedule 3, items 1-6 and list under item 6). The CDF is therefore the named arbiter for eligibility and discretionary determinations in those provisions. This includes, by specific example, eligibility for short absence for removal purposes (subsection 5.11.9.2 as replaced), provisions in Part 7 on housing (subsections 7.7.12.2, 7.7.12.1 are amended), and various provisions across Parts 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 12, 14 and 15 (see Schedule 3, item 6 and the long list). The instrument also replaces “A Defence Housing Australia decision‑maker” with “The CDF” in listed provisions (Schedule 3, item 7). The instrument repeals prior provisions that defined “decision maker” and “Defence Housing Australia decision‑maker” (Schedule 3, item 8), removing those particular delegations from the Determination’s text.

Member rights pertaining to locations and allowances. By inserting new rows into Annex 12.3.B and Annex 16.B, the Determination creates rights to whatever location‑linked benefits the Determination provides when a posting is mapped to those annex rows. For Ukraine, Annex 16.B gets an item 57A with cell values (“12; London (1); Warsaw (1); 4; Yes”). The Determination thereby establishes the parameters that will be used for calculation of hardship or associated benefits for that posting. The instrument also inserts Norway (Oslo) into Annex 12.3.B and Oslo International School into Annex 15.6.A, which creates rights for members whose postings use those annex entries to determine allowances or education entitlements.

Procedural and eligibility duties placed on members. Schedule 4 inserts procedural duties for members seeking recognition of unaccompanied resident family. After paragraph 1.3.20.2.b, new subparagraphs require (c) that the member has applied on the approved form, and (d) that the child meets criteria in Subdivision 4. This creates a duty on the member to use an approved form and to satisfy prescribed criteria in order to obtain recognition and associated benefits.

Defined limits on removal items impose duties on members. Section 6.5.10 (as replaced) lists limitations on what will be removed at public expense, including size and weight limits for small boats and packing requirements for motorbikes. Members must comply with packing and fuel/drain rules to secure removal benefits.

The text of this Amendment Determination does not itself create new penal sanctions or civil penalties. It is an amending instrument which modifies existing entitlement, procedural and decision‑making provisions within Defence Determination 2016/19. The Determination’s internal enforcement mechanisms therefore remain those already present in the base Determination (to the extent they exist), and any penalties or compliance consequences tied to specific benefits or duties will continue to be governed by the underlying Determination or other Defence administrative law processes referenced therein.

What the instrument changes that affects enforcement capacity and administrative control:

• Centralising decision‑making to the CDF. By substituting “CDF” for many earlier “decision‑maker” roles or references to a Defence Housing Australia decision maker (Schedule 3), the instrument concentrates naming of decision authority in a single office. That concentration of named decision authority can affect enforcement and compliance in two ways. First, the Determination now expressly ties the power to authorise or deny certain entitlements to the CDF. Second, because the instrument repeals definitions of the prior decision‑maker roles (Schedule 3, item 8), the textual basis within the Determination for prior delegated decision processes is removed. The instrument itself does not state whether the CDF may delegate those powers, nor does it amend the Defence Act in this document; any delegation would need to be exercised under existing Defence Act powers or other instruments.

• Procedural preconditions that affect entitlement reliance. The added requirement that members apply on an approved form for recognition of unaccompanied resident family (Schedule 4) creates a procedural precondition to entitlement. Failure to comply with the procedural requirement will likely lead to denial of the relevant benefit under the Determination’s terms. The instrument does not alter the procedural enforcement mechanism, but it introduces clearer documentary prerequisites.

• Specific operational limits. New section 6.5.10 imposes size, weight and packing conditions for removals. Non‑compliance (for example, failing to drain petrol/oil or to properly crate a motorbike) is likely to be treated as a failure to meet entitlement conditions and therefore to result in refusal or partial payment for removal of those items, consistent with how the Determination treats other conditions. The instrument does not itself prescribe sanctions, but these are preconditions that gate entitlement.

The instrument is an amending Determination made under s 58B of the Defence Act 1903. Its legal force derives from that statutory authority. The text does not amend the Defence Act itself; rather it modifies an executive instrument (Defence Determination 2016/19) that sits within the statutory framework established by the Defence Act.

Interaction with the Defence Act. The instrument explicitly states it is made under section 58B of the Defence Act 1903 (see Authority). Section 58B (not reproduced here) is the statutory power that enables determinations about conditions of service. This Amendment Determination therefore sits as subordinate legislation under the Defence Act. Any limits on the CDF’s powers or delegation that the Defence Act imposes will continue to apply. The instrument itself does not amend or remove those statutory constraints; it only changes textual references within the Determination.

Interaction with the base Determination (2016/19). This instrument directly amends multiple provisions in Defence Determination 2016/19 by substitution, insertion and repeal. Where it repeals definitions for decision‑maker and substitutes “CDF” for decision‑maker references, it removes the specific textual role names within the Determination and replaces them with an office holder. Those changes alter internal cross‑references inside the Determination. Any other instruments, policies, delegations or administrative guidelines that reference the prior terms (“decision‑maker” or “Defence Housing Australia decision‑maker”) will need to be reconciled with this instrument to avoid inconsistency.

Administrative law and delegation. The instrument names the CDF in many places but does not itself set out delegation instruments. Delegation and administrative law constraints (e.g. requirements to authorise officers to act on behalf of a named decision‑maker) are governed by the Defence Act and any relevant internal delegation instruments. Because the Determination now uses the term “CDF” extensively, operational implementation will require either that decisions be made by the CDF or by officers authorised to act under statutory delegation rules. The instrument does not address delegation mechanics, so practitioners will need to consult existing Defence Act provisions on delegation and any internal delegation instruments.

Interaction with entitlements and external statutes. The instrument changes annexes, tables and formulas that govern how particular entitlements are calculated. Where those entitlements interact with external statutory regimes or social security benefits, employers’ obligations or taxation law, the instrument does not itself address interaction. Any such interplay remains governed by the external statutes and policies. For example, the travel reimbursement formula that references allowable travel costs from Sydney (paragraph 15.3.35.4.b) will need to be reconciled in practice with taxation reporting rules and any other external administrative requirements, but those are not addressed here.

This instrument is titled Defence Determination, Conditions of service Amendment Determination (No. 4) 2025 and amends Defence Determination 2016/19, Conditions of service. The document itself records the following administrative history details:

• Maker and date: The instrument is made by Sarah Kate McGregor, Acting Director General, People Policy and Employment Conditions, Defence People Group, and is dated 8 April 2025.

• Authority: The instrument cites section 58B of the Defence Act 1903 as the statutory authority for making the Determination (see Authority section).

• Commencement: Sections 1 to 4 commence on the day the instrument is registered; Schedules 1 to 5 commence 10 April 2025 (see the Commencement table).

• Schedules and content: The instrument is arranged into Schedules 1 to 5 which amend the 2016/19 Determination in specific ways: Schedule 1 housing amendments, Schedule 2 post index location/benchmark schools/hardship location amendments, Schedule 3 miscellaneous (directly conferred powers) amendments, Schedule 4 miscellaneous amendments (including extensive drafting substitutions and substantive replacements), and Schedule 5 transitional provisions.

• Note on publication: The Commencement table includes a note that information in column 3 is not part of the instrument and may be edited in any published version.

The instrument amends numerous specific subsections, paragraphs and annex entries of Defence Determination 2016/19. Key items include:

• Schedule 1: substitution of “Enoggera” for “Ashgrove” in subsection 7.6.23.3; replacement of Adelaide table item and repeal of paragraph 7.8.46.1.c.

• Schedule 2: insertions into Annex 12.3.B (Norway, Oslo; Ukraine, Kyiv), Annex 15.6.A (Oslo International School), and Annex 16.B (Eritrea; Somalia; South Sudan; Sudan; Ukraine entry 57A with numeric and location columns).

• Schedule 3: replacement of “decision-maker” and similar phrases with “CDF” across a long list of provisions (subsections and paragraphs across many Parts), and repeal of previous decision‑maker definitions and certain subsections related to DHA decision‑makers.

• Schedule 4: substitution of note 2 in section 1.3.1 to reference section 1.2.1 restriction to continuous full‑time service; adding application and criteria requirements for recognition of unaccompanied resident family; replacement of section 6.5.10 with explicit removal limitations; replacement of subsection 7.5.9.3 on temporary accommodation period; replacement of section 7.6.61 on retention of Service residence; replacement of subsection 9.1.7.2 on travel reimbursement where not most economical; replacement of section 9.3.41 on period of eligibility for education benefits; replacement of paragraph 15.3.35.4.b with a two‑part formula; and the long item 16 list replacing quantifiers across scores of provisions.

The instrument contains no reference to litigation, judicial determinations or case law. It does not cite any tribunal or court decisions, nor does it record prior legal challenges to the provisions it amends. The text gives no indication of existing litigation about Defence Determination 2016/19 or this amending Determination.

Because the instrument is an administrative instrument made under section 58B of the Defence Act 1903, actions or decisions made under the Determination continue to be subject to the ordinary structures for challenge or review applicable to administrative decisions (for example, judicial review), but the instrument does not itself address or alter those review pathways in its text. Practitioners looking to challenge a decision under the amended Determination would need to look to the underlying administrative law and the Defence Act framework for any applicable review mechanisms.

In short, the document supplies no litigation history; it is a standalone amending instrument and any litigation arising from its operation or the operation of the amended Determination would be external to the instrument and not recorded in it.

This instrument contains multiple changes that can produce practical pitfalls for administrators, members and advisers. The text itself does not explain policy intent beyond the authority and maker, so the following are concrete operational “gotchas” anchored in the instrument’s provisions.

Centralisation of decision authority. Schedule 3 replaces many earlier references to “decision‑maker” or “a Defence Housing Australia decision‑maker” with “the CDF” and repeals definitions that previously defined those roles. The text therefore names the CDF as the decision‑maker in a wide range of contexts (examples include short absences for removal purposes, housing‑related clauses, dangerous recreational activity definitions, and many parts of the Determination listed in Schedule 3, item 6). Practical implication: the Determination now identifies the CDF as the decision authority, but the instrument does not specify delegation mechanics. Administrators must therefore confirm what internal delegation instruments exist under the Defence Act to ensure decisions attributed to the CDF can be made efficiently by authorised officers and that records show valid delegation. Failure to address delegation can lead to procedural challengeable errors if decisions are not made by a proper delegate or the CDF.

Narrow transitional protection for Ukraine postings. Schedule 5 provides a targeted transitional entitlement only for members on long‑term posting overseas to Ukraine between 1 April 2025 and commencement. The clause applies only to the benefits “they would have been eligible for had the changes made by items 2 and 8 of Schedule 2 been in effect at the time of their posting to Ukraine.” Practitioners must confirm which Schedule 2 items are 2 and 8 (Schedule 2 item 2 inserts UKRAINE Kyiv into Annex 12.3.B; item 8 inserts Ukraine into Annex 16.B with specific column values). The transitional clause does not apply to members whose postings fell outside the specified timeframe or to persons posted to other locations. Mistakenly assuming broader retrospective effect would be an error.

Procedural precondition for unaccompanied resident family recognition. Schedule 4 requires that a member apply for recognition of a child as unaccompanied resident family on the approved form and that the child meet criteria in Subdivision 4. If administrative procedures or staff expectation previously accepted alternative evidence, those practices must be updated. Entitlement decisions may be denied where an approved form is not lodged, even if substantive criteria would otherwise be satisfied.

Quantifier substitutions across many provisions. Schedule 4, item 16, contains a large set of precise textual substitutions that change “either”, “both”, “the following”, and similar terms into “any”, “all of the following”, “one of the following” and so on. In many statutory contexts, changing conjunctive and disjunctive language alters whether all criteria must be met versus any one criterion suffices. Because these substitutions occur across many provisions, careful clause‑by‑clause review is required. Assuming no substantive change would be a risky shortcut. Advisors must map the old text to new text for each affected clause to determine whether entitlement tests are stricter or broader.

Practical compliance requires an operational checklist for three stakeholder groups: (1) members and their representatives, (2) Defence administrative units (housing, people policy, finance, transport), and (3) legal/compliance teams. The instrument places new procedural requirements on members and changes the identity of decision authority; operational systems and guidance must be updated.

For members and their advisers

• If you are or were posted to Ukraine between 1 April 2025 and commencement, check Schedule 5. You are expressly covered by the transitional clause if you were on a long‑term posting overseas to Ukraine in that window and should be treated as eligible for the benefits that would have applied had the Ukraine entries in Schedule 2 been effective at posting. Seek a written determination if entitlement is disputed.

• For recognition of unaccompanied resident family, prepare to lodge the approved application form. Schedule 4 (inserted after paragraph 1.3.20.2) requires the member to apply on the approved form and for the child to meet criteria set in Subdivision 4. Do not rely on informal notifications; use the approved form and retain evidence of lodging.

• For removals, review 6.5.10 (as replaced) and ensure any small watercraft, lawn lockers, tool sheds or motorbikes meet the specified size, weight and packing requirements. If you plan to claim removal of such items, ensure packing and mechanical draining of fuel/oil is done in accordance with the new requirements and retain evidence (photos, receipts, packing agent confirmations).

• For temporary accommodation claims, note subsection 7.5.9.3: up to 3 nights eligibility at the losing location; at the gaining location eligibility lasts until furniture and effects are delivered to a dwelling or storage at the location. Keep documentation of dates of uplift, delivery, and storage to support claims.

• For close-relative overseas travel claims, use the new formula in paragraph 15.3.35.4.b. Prepare supporting fare receipts and, if seeking to compute the A minus B calculation, ensure you document the allowable travel cost calculations from the posting location and from Sydney.

For Defence administrative units (housing, removals, transport, people policy, finance)

• Update all operational guides, standard operating procedures and staff training materials to reflect the textual changes in this instrument, especially where “decision‑maker” references have been replaced by “CDF” (Schedule 3). Establish and record the delegations under the Defence Act or other instruments that authorise officers to exercise the functions that the Determination now names as “CDF” decisions. Ensure delegation documents are published internally and that decision records show proper authorisation.