Australian Postal Commission v Quinn, S.P - [1989] FCA 405

Re: AUSTRALIAN POSTAL COMMISSION
And: SUSAN PATRICIA QUINN
No. NG 1370 of 1988
FED No. 405
Commonwealth Employees' Compensation
30 IR 347

COURT

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
Wilcox J.(1)

CATCHWORDS

Commonwealth Employees' Compensation - Partially incapacitated employee claiming deemed totally incapacitated - Meaning of phrase "employment of a kind that is not commonly available" - Whether evidence of that fact before Tribunal.

Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act 1971 s.26.

HEARING

SYDNEY

#DATE 1:8:1989

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr D M J Bennett QC with Mr R B Wilson

Solicitors for the Applicant: Australian Government Solicitor

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr M F Adams QC with Mrs J C Kelly

Solicitors for the Respondent: McClellands

ORDER

The appeal be dismissed.

The applicant pay the costs of the respondent.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

JUDGE1

This case raises questions concerning the application of some important words in the Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act 1971. That Act was repealed by the Commonwealth Employees' Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988, which commenced operation on 1 December 1988. However, the 1971 Act remains relevant to the present case, which is an appeal by the Australian Postal Commission against a decision given in favour of an employee of the Commission, Susan Patricia Quinn, by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Mr M D Allen, Senior Member). That decision was announced on 24 October 1988 and was made under the 1971 Act. The applicant contends that the decision was erroneous, in point of law, so that it should be set aside, and the matter remitted to the Tribunal for further hearing. Such a hearing would need to pay regard to the transitional provisions contained in Part X of the 1988 Act. But, if the Tribunal's decision was free from legal error, it will stand and benefits will be payable to Mrs Quinn notwithstanding the repeal of the 1971 Act.

The questions of law raised by the appeal arise out of s.26 of the 1971 Act. That section read:

"26. For the purposes of this Part, an employee shall be deemed to be totally incapacitated for work if his incapacity is such that he is fitted only for employment of a kind that is not commonly available and employment of that kind is not reasonably available to him."

The first question is the meaning of the words "that is not commonly available". The second question is whether there was evidence before the Tribunal, in this particular case, that the work for which Mrs Quinn was fitted was not commonly available.
The relevant facts, as found by the Tribunal, may be stated briefly. Mrs Quinn was employed by the Commission as a postal officer, serving at Fairfield post office. On 12 July 1984, during the course of her employment, she injured her neck. She was granted worker's compensation until 5 November 1984, when she returned to work. However, in February 1985…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Australian Postal Commission v Quinn, S.P

Details

AGLC: Australian Postal Commission v Quinn, S.P [1989] FCA 405
Case: [1989] FCA 405
Decision Date: 01 AUGUST 1989

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Court, Australian Postal Commission sought to appeal a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which found that an employee, Quinn, was totally incapacitated for work. Quinn had been deemed partially incapacitated, however, he claimed that he was totally incapacitated due to his inability to find suitable employment given his condition. The court was required to determine the meaning of the phrase "employment of a kind that is not commonly available" as it pertains to an employee's total incapacity for work.

The court examined the legislative framework and previous case law to determine the correct interpretation of the phrase. It was held that the phrase meant employment that was not readily available to the general public, not just employment that was not commonly available to the employee in question. The court also found that the AAT had erred in its consideration of the evidence regarding the availability of suitable employment, as it had not correctly applied the correct legal test. As such, the appeal was dismissed and the costs of the respondent were awarded to the applicant.

The court's decision highlights the importance of correctly interpreting legislative provisions and applying the correct legal test when determining an employee's total incapacity for work. The court also emphasised the need for the AAT to properly consider all relevant evidence when making its decisions. The outcome of this case may have implications for other employees seeking to be deemed totally incapacitated for work due to their inability to find suitable employment.

Orders

Orders of the court

The appeal be dismissed.

The applicant pay the costs of the respondent.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.