Clifford v McCorp Pty Ltd

In the case of Clifford v McCorp Pty Ltd, the dispute centred on the decision of the Arbitrator regarding the admissibility of new evidence in the context of an appeal. The matter was heard and determined by the Commission, following an appeal from the decision of the Arbitrator. The primary legal issues before the court were whether the new evidence, specifically an oral statement from Mr McKenzie, should be admitted under the guidelines of Practice Direction No. 6, and whether the failure to admit this evidence would cause a substantial injustice to the appellant, Mr Clifford.

The court examined the criteria set out in Practice Direction No. 6, which require that new evidence could not reasonably have been obtained and tendered in the proceedings before the Arbitrator and that its exclusion would result in a substantial injustice. The Arbitrator had explicitly stated that he did not rely on Mr McKenzie's evidence for his conclusions. The court found that the issues at hand were questions of law concerning the onus of proof and the criteria for determining whether Mr Clifford qualified as a 'worker' under the workers compensation legislation. The court concluded that the exclusion of Mr McKenzie's oral evidence would not cause a substantial injustice, given the nature of the legal issues involved.

After reviewing the Arbitrator's reasons for decision and the submissions from both parties, the court found that there was no need for an oral hearing or additional oral evidence. The court determined that it had sufficient information to make a decision on the papers, in accordance with section 354(6) of the 1998 Act. The Arbitrator had provided detailed written reasons for his decision, taking into account the unrepresented status of Mr Clifford and ensuring that he understood the proceedings. This consideration was consistent with the Commission's 'Access and Equity Service Charter'.