Legal Research
Cases
Australian Telecommunications Commission v Tzikas

Australian Telecommunications Commission v Tzikas

Link copied

Case Copied 12 August 1985 95 min read

Contents

On this page

CATCHWORDS

>.,

Trlbunal - iompensatlon fCommonwealth Governmeht, Employees,

&&	1971 - llablllty of the Commonwealth to pay compensatlon

In respect

of an injured employee pursuant

to award under the

Act - dlrect

effects

of orlginal ~ n ~ u r y

ceaslng to

lncapacltatlng - "sequelae" of injury

havlng

continulng

effects - whether exlstlng neurosis aggravated by

"sequelae"

- whether

aggravation

contributed

t o

Commonwealth

employment	-	whether aggravation contributing to current
incapaclty.

Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act

1971

ss.5(1),

5(11),

2 7 ( 1 ) ,

2 9 ( 1 ) ,

2 9 ( 2 ) ,

31(4).

AUSTRALIAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION	v. VICKI TZIWS
VG No. 236 of 1385

Smithers, Sweeney and Hoodward	JJ.
12 August 1385

Melbourne

- >

f r

* > I

' IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA 1

)

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	)	No. VG 236 of 1984
1

DIVISION

GENERAL

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE GENERAL ADMINISTRTIVE DIVISION

OF THE ADMINISTPATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL CONSTITUTED

BY MR I.R. THOMPSON [DEFIJTY PRESIDENT)

THE

COURT: Smithers, Sweeney and Woodward

JJ.

DATE

12 August 1985

PLACE

Melbourne

MINUTE OF ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS:

1. That the appeal be upheld.

That the decision

of the Tribunal dated

July 1984 be set aside.

3 . That the matter be remitted to the Trlbunal

for Its determlnation in the light

the

opmion of the court.

4. That costs of the origlnal hearing before the

Tribunal be determined

by the TribunaL

That liberty be reserved

to the applicant to

make such application in relation to costs as

it may

be advised.

Note: Settlement and entry of Orders is dealt with in

Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IW T!IE KJD-FfiAL

COURT 01- AUSTRALIA )

VICTORTA T)TSTECx REGTSTR'I	)	NO. VG 236 of 1905
)
GEWRPL DIVISION	)

On appeal from the

Administrative Appeals

Trlbunal

Setween

: AUSTRALIAN

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

(Applicant)

A A :

VICKI TZIXAS

(Respondent)

Coram: Smithers, Sweeney and Noodward

JJ.

Date :

1 2 August 1985

Reasons €or Judment

Snlithers J. :

This is an

appeal

from

a decision ("the

decision") of a Deputy President Tribunal ("the Tribunal") t o set aside a determination of

of the Administrative Appeals

the

delegate of the Commissinner for EmpLoyees' Compensation

( "the

determination") and remit the matter to the Commissioner for

reconsideration,

applicanli

the

w1 th

Australian

Telecommunlcntions

Commission

( "Telecom")

pay

the

respondent's %costs.

The determinatlon, dated

20 June

1903,

was in terms that Tclecom was not lxable to pay compensation

In accordance

with

the

provlsions

the

Compensation

I .

2 .

(Commonwealth Govcrnment Employees) Act 1971

("the Act") in

r~spect

of .Iny Incapacity for wock suffered by the respondent

nn zn,.t fkom

the

date

of determination, or in

respect of any

medlcal treatment undergone by the respondeqt on and from that

date.

The matter was remitted

to the Commissioner by the

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Australian Telecommunications Commission v Tzikas and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1985] FCA 385
Decision Date: 12 Aug 1985

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal was against the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) which had held that Vicki Tzikas was entitled to compensation for her total incapacity for work from 20 June 1983 onwards. The Tribunal had determined that Tzikas’ incapacity was due to her pre-existing condition of psychoneurosis, which had been aggravated by her employment with the Australian Telecommunications Commission (Telecom). Telecom argued that the Tribunal had erred in its decision by not finding that Tzikas’ incapacity was solely due to her natural illness, unaffected by the aggravation of her condition by her employment. The central issue before the court was whether the sequelae of the aggravation of Tzikas’ illness by Telecom were still contributing to her incapacity for work. The court held that the Tribunal had erred in its approach to determining whether the sequelae of the aggravation of Tzikas' illness by her employment with Telecom were still contributing to her incapacity for work. The court found that the Tribunal had not made any findings as to whether the sequelae had contributed to aggravating Tzikas' neurosis. Instead, the Tribunal had only considered whether the sequelae contributed to her incapacity. The court emphasised that for Telecom to be liable for compensation, it must be shown that the aggravation or acceleration of Tzikas’ illness by her employment with Telecom was still contributing to her incapacity for work. The court found that the Tribunal had not made any findings to establish that the sequelae had contributed to aggravating Tzikas' neurosis. The court also found that the Tribunal had not considered the issue of causation in relation to the sequelae. The court concluded that the matter should be remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration in light of these errors. The court upheld the appeal and set aside the decision of the Tribunal. The matter was remitted to the Tribunal for its determination in accordance with the court's observations. The costs of the original hearing before the Tribunal were to be determined by the Tribunal itself. Telecom was granted liberty to make an application in relation to costs as it may be advised.

Orders