Australian National Airlines Commission v Cassidy

[1964] HCA 32

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Taylor, Menzies and Windeyer JJ.

AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL AIRLINES COMMISSION v. CASSIDY

(1964) 110 CLR 172

15 May 1964

Workers' Compensation

Workers' Compensation—Commonwealth employees—Claim for compensation—Refusal by Commissioner to entertain—Failure of employee to give notice of accident etc.—Appeal to District Court—Not general appeal but limited to review of determination of Commissioner on preliminary matter—"Admit"—Commonwealth Employees' Compensation Act 1930-1939 (Cth), ss. 16*, 20.

Decision

May 15.
The Court delivered the following written judgment:-
The only question to be determined upon this appeal is whether, when the Commissioner for Employees' Compensation has decided pursuant to s. 16 of the Commonwealth Employees' Compensation Act 1930-1959 (Cth) that he cannot "admit a claim" because of non-compliance with the provisions of that section, an appeal taken to a County Court pursuant to s. 20 of the Act against the Commissioner's determination or action is limited to the question whether s. 16 was correctly applied or whether, if it be decided that it was not, the County Court can proceed to determine the claim and award compensation. (at p175)

2. The appeal given by s. 20 is against "the determination or action" of the Commissioner and it seems to us that when the Commissioner has done no more than decide that s. 16 prevents his consideration of the claim, it is not open to the County Court on an appeal from that determination to go beyond this preliminary matter and decide the merits of the claim. It appears clearly from the provisos to s. 16 (1) that the word "admit" in the opening words of the section means "entertain", not "grant". This construction is reinforced by reference to other sections of the Act such as s. 9 which provides that in the circumstances there stated "compensation claimed . . . shall . . . be disallowed" and s. 10 which provides that in the circumstances there stated "compensation shall not be payable". The distinction which is apparent is between not hearing a claim and determining a claim adversely to the applicant. (at p175)

3. Since the Commonwealth does not now seek to challenge the order on any ground other than that the appeal was limited to the preliminary point, our proper course is to set aside so much of the decision of the County Court as went beyond determing that the Commissioner was not prevented by s. 16 from consideration of the respondent's claim, so leaving his claim to be determined by the Commissioner. Having regard to the nature of the matter submitted to us for determination, we think we should make no order as to costs. (at p175)

Orders

Appeal allowed. Set aside so much of the order of the District Court as ordered that the appellant be awarded weekly payments and medical expenses in accordance with the Commonwealth Employees' Compensation Act 1930-1959 and that in the event of the parties failing to reach agreement as to the amounts payable to the appellant under the aforesaid Act either party be at liberty to apply to the Court for determination of the amounts payable to the appellant aforesaid upon the giving of two days' notice to the other party.