This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the decision for a list of the amendments.
Court of Appeal
New South Wales
Case Title: Ayoub v AMP Bank Limited Medium Neutral Citation: [2011] NSWCA 263 Hearing Date(s): 4 August 2011 Decision Date: 7 September 2011 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Basten JA at [1]
Whealy JA at [2]
Sackville AJA [81]Decision: (1) Appeal dismissed;
(2) Appellant to pay the respondent's costs.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]Catchwords: WORKERS COMPENSATION - appeal - appeal against finding of the Acting Deputy President - appeal limited to party being aggrieved by a decision of the Presidential member in point of law - denial of procedural fairness - matter proceeded on the papers - failure to consider oral hearing when matters of credit to be decided - whether parties acquiesced in review on the papers - whether failure of Acting Deputy President to take into account internal retrenchment policies of appellant constituted an error of law - no error shown - no denial of procedural fairness. Legislation Cited: Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) ss 9A, 11A
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act (NSW) 1998Cases Cited: State Transit Authority of NSW v Chemler [2007] NSWCA 249; 5 DDCR 286
Manly Pacific International Hotel Pty Limited v Doyle [1999] NSWCA 465; 19 NSWCCR 181
State Transit Authority of New South Wales v Chemler [2007] NSWCA 249; (2007) 5 DDCR 28
Fletcher International Exports Pty Ltd v Lott & Anor [2010] NSWCA 63 at 42
Hancock v East Coast Timber Products Pty Limited [2011] NSWCA 11 per Beazley JA at [96], [120] - [122]Texts Cited: Category: Principal judgment Parties: Joanne Ayoub (Appellant)
AMP Bank Limited (Respondent)Representation - Counsel: T Robertson SC / E Welch (Appellant)
L King SC / P Perry (Respondent)- Solicitors: Paramount Lawyers (Appellant)
Hicksons (Respondent)File number(s): 2010/96739 Decision Under Appeal - Court / Tribunal: - Before: Acting Deputy President Moore - Date of Decision: 14 April 2010 - Citation: - Court File Number(s) A1-3398/09 Publication Restriction:
JUDGMENT
BASTEN JA: In this matter, the appeal should be dismissed with costs, for the reasons given by Whealy JA.
WHEALY JA: In 2004, Joanne Ayoub (the appellant) was employed by the AMP Bank Limited (the respondent) as one of three Product Managers. This was a relatively senior executive position. For several years, she worked in this position and did so with some distinction. In 2007, however, her work situation began to deteriorate. First, in February 2007, a gentleman called Robert Slocombe replaced Therese Matthews as the appellant's manager. Mr Slocombe was known to the…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Ayoub v AMP Bank Limited 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2011] NSWCA 263
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Acting Deputy President had erred by proceeding with the review on the papers without an oral hearing, particularly when matters of credit were to be decided, and whether this constituted a denial of procedural fairness. Additionally, the court considered whether the Acting Deputy President's failure to take into account Ayoub's internal retrenchment policies amounted to an error of law.
The court found no error of law and no denial of procedural fairness. It reasoned that the parties had, by their conduct, acquiesced in the review proceeding on the papers. Furthermore, the court determined that the Acting Deputy President was not obliged to consider the internal retrenchment policies as they were not a relevant factor in determining the legal issues before the Commission.
Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and Ayoub was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) Appeal dismissed;
(2) Appellant to pay the respondent's costs.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
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.