Chubb Security Australia Pty Ltd v Annette Treverrow

Chubb Security Australia Pty Ltd v Annette Treverrow is a decision concerning a dispute between an employer and a former employee regarding workers' compensation. The case was heard by the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Commission (the Commission) constituted by an Arbitrator, with an appeal subsequently made by the employer to the same Commission constituted by a Presidential member. The central issue in the case was whether the Arbitrator's decision to award compensation to the employee was correct. Specifically, the employer contested the Arbitrator's findings on the causation of the employee's injury, the calculation of the weekly compensation amount, and the determination of certain expenses.

The legal issues before the Commission on appeal included whether the Arbitrator erred in finding that the employee's injury arose out of or in the course of her employment, whether the employment was a substantial contributing factor to the injury, and if there were any errors of law in the Arbitrator's failure to provide reasons for her decision. The employer also challenged the Arbitrator's method of determining the weekly wage rate and questioned the validity of the expenses awarded. Furthermore, the employer argued that the Arbitrator's determination of the employee's incapacity and expenses was not made pursuant to section 60 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998.

The Commission found that the Arbitrator had indeed erred in several respects. The Commission held that the Arbitrator had failed to provide reasons for her decision, which was a breach of natural justice. Additionally, the Commission found that the Arbitrator's determination of the weekly wage rate and the expenses was not in accordance with the law. The Commission also noted that the Arbitrator had incorrectly determined the employee's incapacity and the expenses. Consequently, the Commission revoked the Arbitrator's decision and remitted the matter back to her for reconsideration according to law. The Commission did not order any costs.

In summary, the appeal by the employer was successful in part. The Commission upheld the Arbitrator's finding that the employee's injury arose out of or in the course of her employment and that the employment was a substantial contributing factor. However, the Commission found that the Arbitrator had made errors in the calculation of compensation and in the determination of expenses. The matter was remitted back to the Arbitrator for reconsideration.