JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
CITATION: BEASLEY -v- PILBARA MINING ALLIANCE PTY LTD [2022] WASCA 25
CORAM: QUINLAN CJ
MURPHY JA
TOTTLE J
HEARD: 16 NOVEMBER 2021
DELIVERED : 24 FEBRUARY 2022
FILE NO/S: CACV 98 of 2020
BETWEEN: KAREN ANNETTE BEASLEY
Appellant
AND
PILBARA MINING ALLIANCE PTY LTD
Respondent
ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram: GETHING DCJ
Citation: BEASLEY -v- FORTESCUE METALS GROUP LTD [2020] WADC 118
File Number : APP 2 of 2020
Catchwords:
Workers' compensation - Appeal from a decision of a judge dismissing an appeal from an arbitrator's decision - Arbitrator dismissed appellant's application under s 217 of the Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA) - Whether s 91 and s 92 of the Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA) give rise to an implied prohibition against an injured worker seeking compensation under the Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA) other than under s 91 - No implied prohibition
Legislation:
Workers' Compensation Act 1902 (WA), s 7, s 9
Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA), s 3, s 5, s 18, s 21, s 22, s 31C, s 86, s 91, s 92, s 93B, s 93C, s 93D, s 93E, s 93K, s 93L, s 93M, s 93P, s 176, s 177, s 178, s 179, s 182A, s 182ZT, s 217, s 219, s 254, s 303, Sch 1
Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Regulations 1982 (WA), reg 6AA
Workers' Compensation Reform Act 2004 (WA), s 79
Result:
Leave to appeal granted
Appeal allowed
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
| Appellant | : | MJ Lourey |
| Respondent | : | CC Rimmer |
Solicitors:
| Appellant | : | Chapmans Barristers & Solicitors |
| Respondent | : | Sparke Helmore Lawyers |
Case(s) referred to in decision(s):
Armet v CFC Consolidated Pty Ltd [2019] WASCA 165
Beasley v Fortescue Metals Group Ltd [2020] WADC 118
Dosset v TKJ Nominees Pty Ltd [2003] HCA 69; (2003) 218 CLR 1
Ivanhoe Gold Corporation Ltd v Symonds [1906] HCA 71; (1906) 4 CLR 642
Knight v FP Special Assets Ltd [1992] HCA 28; (1992) 174 CLR 178
Kuligowski v Metrobus [2004] HCA 34; (2004) 220 CLR 363
Mansfield v Director of Public Prosecutions (WA) [2006] HCA 38; (2006) 226 CLR 486
McNair v Press Offshore Ltd (1997) 17 WAR 191
Mokta v Metro Meat International Ltd [2005] WASCA 143
Ta v Lucky Import and Export Co Ply Ltd [2002] WASCA 65
Taylor v Owners - Strata Plan No 11564 [2014] HCA 9; (2014) 253 CLR 531
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:
Overview
This is an appeal from a decision of a judge of the District Court dismissing an appeal from a decision of an arbitrator made under pt XI of the Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA) (the Act).[1] The arbitrator had dismissed an application brought by the appellant under s 217 of the Act for an extension of the prescribed amount for weekly payments for incapacity. The…
Continue reading Beasley v Pilbara Mining Alliance Pty Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Beasley v Pilbara Mining Alliance Pty Ltd [2022] WASCA 25
- Case
- [2022] WASCA 25
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the arbitrator's decision to limit the employer's total liability for Mr. Beasley's permanent total incapacity for work was in accordance with the statutory framework set out in the Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA). Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the arbitrator had properly applied s 217 of the Act, which outlines the criteria and limits for ordering total liability in cases of permanent total incapacity. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the arbitrator had appropriately exercised his discretion in light of Mr. Beasley's social and financial circumstances, as well as his reasonable financial needs.
The court found that the arbitrator had correctly applied the statutory provisions and exercised his discretion in accordance with the law. The arbitrator had considered Mr. Beasley's social and financial circumstances and determined that the employer's total liability should not exceed the prescribed limits. The court upheld the arbitrator's decision, noting that there was no error in the application of s 217. The court also confirmed that Mr. Beasley's compensation payments were protected under s 303 of the Act and could not be assigned, charged, or attached except in certain circumstances.
The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the arbitrator's decision. Consequently, the employer's total liability for Mr. Beasley's permanent total incapacity for work was upheld as determined by the arbitrator, and the compensation payments remained protected under the provisions of the Act.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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
Division 4 of pt XI establishes the Workers' Compensation Arbitration Service and regulates the arbitration of disputes under pt XI. Division 4 includes s 182ZT that provides:182ZT.Application for arbitrationIf a dispute has not been resolved by conciliation, a party to the dispute may apply to the Registrar in accordance with this Act and the arbitration rules for determination of the dispute by arbitration. Division 4 of pt XI also includes s 217. Section 217 provides:217.Order as to total liability of employer(1)This section applies where -(a)an arbitrator considers that an injury to a worker that is compensable under this Act has resulted in the permanent total incapacity for work of the worker; and(b)an order for redemption of the liability for the incapacity has not already been made under section 67; and(c)no memorandum of agreement for the payment of a lump sum in redemption of the liability for the incapacity has been recorded under section 76; and(d)the total weekly payments by way of compensation payable under clause 7 for that injury have reached the prescribed amount.(2)If this section applies, the arbitrator may, subject to this section, make any order as to the total liability of the employer for the incapacity that the arbitrator thinks proper in the circumstances.(3)An arbitrator is not to make an order under subsection (2) unless the arbitrator considers an order ought to be made, having regard to the social and financial circumstances and the reasonable financial needs of the worker.(4)The total liability of the employer ordered under this section is not to exceed the lesser of -(a)an amount equal to 75% of the prescribed amount; or(b)weekly payments at the rate to which the worker was entitled at the time when the total weekly payments for the injury of the worker reached the prescribed amount ‑(i)for the period of the expectation of life of the worker; or(ii)if section 56 or Schedule 5 clause 2 applies in respect of the incapacity, up to the date when weekly payments would cease by reason of age,whichever is the shorter. (5)An arbitrator is to deal with the payment of the final liability by ordering weekly payments at such rate as the arbitrator thinks proper in the circumstances, having regard to the matters referred to in subsection (3), but not at a rate that exceeds the rate to which the worker was entitled at the time when the total weekly payments for the injury of the worker reached the prescribed amount.(6)In making an order as to final liability under this section an arbitrator may order payment of an amount for arrears of such weekly payments from the time when the total weekly payments for the worker's injury reached the prescribed amount to the date of the order. On filing a certified copy of an arbitrator's decision in a court of competent jurisdiction, the decision is taken to be an order of that court and may be enforced accordingly.[20][20] Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA) s 219. Section 303 restricts the extent to which compensation may be assigned, charged or attached. It provides:303.Compensation payments not assignable(1)A payment of compensation, or a sum paid by way of redemption thereof, is not capable of being assigned, charged or attached, and shall not pass to another person by operation of the law, nor shall any claim be set off against such payment or sum, except in respect of voluntary advances of future compensation made by an employer or insurer with the approval of the Director.(2)A person who purports or agrees to do anything the doing of which is prevented by subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable to a fine of $5 000.