NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
CITATION:
BOJKO v ICM PROPERTY SERVICE PTY LTD & ORS [2009] NSWCA 175
FILE NUMBER(S):
40430/08
HEARING DATE(S):
23/06/2009
JUDGMENT DATE:
2 July 2009
PARTIES:
Nikola Bojko - Appellant
ICM Property Service Pty Limited- First Respondent
Registrar of the Workers Compensation Commission - Second Respondent
An Appeal Panel constituted under s.328 of the Workplace Injury Management Act 1998 (NSW) - Third Respondent
JUDGMENT OF:
Allsop P Giles JA Handley AJA
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:
Supreme Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):
SC 30142/07
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:
Malpass As/J
LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION:
11/09/2008
LOWER COURT MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:
[2008] NSWSC 907
COUNSEL:
C Jackson - Appellant
L P McFee - First Respondent
Submitting appearance filed for 2nd and 3rd Respondents
SOLICITORS:
Martin Bell & Co - Appellant
Ellson Tillyard Callanan - First Respondent
I V Knight, Crown Solicitor - 2nd and 3rd Respondents
CATCHWORDS:
WORKERS COMPENSATION – binding medical assessment – Appeal Panel – conduct of review – despite worker’s request Panel did not conduct further medical examination - whether grounds for judicial review.
JUDICIAL REVIEW – workers compensation – binding medical assessment – reasons of Appeal Panel – whether Panel treated relevant consideration as irrelevant – proper approach to reasons of Panel.
LEGISLATION CITED:
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998
CATEGORY:
Principal judgment
CASES CITED:
Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang [1996] HCA 6
W389/01A v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA FC 432
TEXTS CITED:
DECISION:
(1) Leave to appeal granted.
(2) Dispense with the filing of a notice of appeal or further compliance with the rules.
(3) Appeal dismissed with costs.
JUDGMENT:
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL
CA40430/08
ALLSOP P
GILES JA
HANDLEY AJA2 July 2009
NIKOLA BOJKO v ICM PROPERTY SERVICE PTY LTD & ORS
CATCHWORDS
WORKERS COMPENSATION – binding medical assessment – Appeal Panel – conduct of review – despite worker’s request Panel did not conduct further medical examination – whether grounds for judicial review.
JUDICIAL REVIEW – workers compensation – binding medical assessment – reasons of Appeal Panel – whether Panel treated relevant consideration as irrelevant – proper approach to reasons of Panel.
HEADNOTE
An Appeal Panel constituted under Pt 7 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 as amended allowed in part the worker’s appeal from a binding medical assessment certificate. Despite the worker’s request they did not have a further medical examination. The worker’s challenge to the Appeal Panel’s certificate in judicial review proceedings was dismissed and he sought leave to appeal. HELD: granting leave but dismissing the appeal (1) the Panel’s reasons adequately explained why they had decided that a further medical examination was not necessary; (2) their reasons were not to be construed with an eye attuned to the perception of error; (3) their reasons, properly construed, did not demonstrate that they had failed to consider the worker’s request, or had treated it as an irrelevant…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Bojko v ICM Property Service Pty Ltd 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
- [2009] NSWCA 175
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the Appeal Panel's refusal to conduct a further medical examination constituted grounds for judicial review, and whether the Appeal Panel had treated a relevant consideration as irrelevant in its reasons for decision, and what the proper approach to the reasons of the Appeal Panel should be.
The Court of Appeal held that the Appeal Panel was not obliged to conduct a further medical examination. It reasoned that the Appeal Panel's role was to review the existing medical evidence and the decision of the original medical assessor, not to conduct a de novo assessment. The Court found that the Appeal Panel had adequately considered the worker's submissions and the relevant evidence, and that its reasons for decision were sufficient. The Court applied the principles of judicial review, emphasizing that the Appeal Panel's decision would only be set aside if it had made an error of law, such as failing to consider a relevant matter or considering an irrelevant matter.
Leave to appeal was granted, and the appeal was dismissed with costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) Leave to appeal granted. (2) Dispense with the filing of a notice of appeal or further compliance with the rules. (3) Appeal dismissed with costs.
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.