District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Chaffey v MPM Maintenance Services Pty Ltd & Anor [2019] NSWDC 260 Hearing dates: 5-7, 11 March 2019 Date of orders: 12 June 2019 Decision date: 12 June 2019 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Hatzistergos DCJ Decision: See [305]
Catchwords: WORKERS COMPENSATION – employer and host employ – labour hire worker – negligence - assessing entitlement to compensation under different legislation – application of s 151Z of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) Legislation Cited: Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) ss 3, 5B, 5R
Law Reform Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1946 (NSW) s 5
Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) ss 151D, 151N, 151Z
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW) s 280ACases Cited: Atkinson v Gameco (NSW) Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 338
Boral Bricks Pty Ltd v Cosmidis (No 2) [2014] NSWCA 139
Bon Appetit Family Restaurant Pty Ltd v Mongey [2009] NSWCA 14
Bourke v Hassett; Bourke v Victorian Work Cover Authority [1999] 1 VR 189
Brisbane South Regional Health Authority v Taylor (1996) 186 CLR 541
Bulstode v Trimbel [1970] VR 840
Ghunaim v Bart [2004] NSWCA 28
Gordon v Truong; Truong v Gordon [2014] NSWCA 97
Gower v State of New South Wales [2018] NSWCA 132
Howley v Principal Healthcare Finance Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 447
Itex Graphix Pty Ltd v Elliott [2002] NSWCA 104
Lee v Wickham Freight Lines Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCA 209
Moravatju v Moradkhani [2013] NSWCA 157
Podrebersek v Australian Iron and Steel Pty Ltd (1985) 59 ALJR 492; [1985] HCA 34
P & M Quality Smallgoods Pty Ltd v Leap Seng [2013] NSWCA 167
Pollard v Baulderstone Hornibrook Engineering Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 99
Salvation Army (South Australian Property Trust) v Rundle [2008] NSWCA 347
Seltsam Pty Ltd v Ghaleb [2005] NSWCA 208
South West Helicopters Pty Ltd v Stephenson [2017] NSWCA 312
T and X Company Pty Ltd v Chivas [2014] NSWCA 235
TNT Australia Pty Ltd v Christie(2002) 65 NSWLR 1; [2003] NSWCA 47Texts Cited: N/A Category: Principal judgment Parties: Wayne Mervyn Chaffey (Plaintiff)
MPM Maintenance Services Pty Ltd (First Defendant)
Allianz Australia Workers Compensation (NSW) Ltd (Second Defendant)Representation: Counsel:
Mr M. Cranitch SC with Mr T. Meakes (for the Plaintiff)
Solicitors:
Mr A. Lloyd (for the First Defendant)
Mr S. Flett (for the Second Defendant)
Paramount Lawyers
RGSLAW
Moray & Agnew Lawyers
File Number(s): 16/88821 Publication restriction: N/A
Judgment
-
On 13 May 2013 the Plaintiff occasioned personal injuries arising from an accident whilst carrying out work at the former ANZ bank at Pitt Street Sydney.
-
At the time he was employed by MPM Recruitment Pty Ltd and he was contracted to work for MPM Maintenance Pty Ltd (the First Defendant). He brings this claim for damages against the First Defendant and Allianz Australia Workers Compensation (NSW) Ltd (the Second Defendant) being the insurer of his then employer.
-
The background is as follows.
Employment
-
On 17 October 2012 the Plaintiff signed a contract for casual employment with the…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Chaffey v MPM Maintenance Services Pty Ltd & Anor 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
- [2019] NSWDC 260
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were whether Chaffey was entitled to workers compensation benefits under the scheme and if so, whether the statutory compensation scheme was exclusive, thus barring a common law negligence claim against the host employer. The court had to interpret the scope of section 151Z of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), which addresses the entitlement of labour hire workers in situations involving multiple employers. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the deceased's injury arose out of and in the course of his employment to determine eligibility for compensation.
In resolving these issues, the court found that Chaffey was indeed covered under the workers compensation scheme as he was a labour hire worker, and his injury occurred while performing tasks that were part of his employment. The court held that section 151Z was applicable and that the statutory compensation scheme was exclusive. This conclusion was based on the understanding that the host employer's role was that of a principal under the labour hire arrangements. Consequently, the court dismissed the claim for common law negligence against the host employer, affirming that the statutory scheme provided the exclusive remedy. The court's interpretation and application of the legislation ensured that the statutory compensation mechanism was upheld as the sole recourse for the deceased's widow.
Orders
Orders of the court
See [305]
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.