Collins v Dux Manufacturing Ltd - [2021] NSWSC 193

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Collins v Dux Manufacturing Ltd [2021] NSWSC 193
Hearing dates: On the papers
Date of orders: 2 March 2021
Decision date: 02 March 2021
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Administrative Law
Before: Harrison AsJ
Decision:
The Court orders that:
(1) The decision of the Registrar of the Workers Compensation Commission dated 7 May 2020 is quashed.
(2) The Certificate of Determination issued by the Workers Compensation Commission on 11 June 2020 giving effect to the decision of the Registrar is set aside.
(3) The matter is remitted to the Workers Compensation Commission to be dealt with according to law.
(4) The parties are to pay their own costs. If the parties seek a different costs order, they have liberty to make submissions within 14 days from the date of this judgment.

Catchwords:
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – judicial review – decision of a delegate of the Registrar of the Workers Compensation Commission as to whether appeal to Appeal Panel should be allowed to proceed – where delegate determined several of the plaintiff’s proposed grounds of appeal to the Appeal Panel on a final and conclusory basis – where error of law conceded – decision quashed

Legislation Cited:
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 69
Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), ss 4, 9, 9A
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW), ss 319, 325, 327, 328, 331

Cases Cited:
Ballas v Department of Education (State of NSW) [2020] NSWCA 86
Ferguson v State of New South Wales [2017] NSWSC 887
Fraser v AAI Ltd (t/as GIO) [2020] NSWSC 1333
Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd v Lakovska [2014] NSWCA 194
Mackey v CIC Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd [2015] NSWSC 505

Texts Cited:
NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (Fourth edition, 1 April 2016)

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Shirley Collins (Plaintiff)
Dux Manufacturing Ltd (First Defendant)
Delegate of the Registrar of the Workers Compensation Commission of New South Wales (Second Defendant)
Workers Compensation Commission of New South Wales (Third Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
D Hooke SC with E Grotte (Plaintiff)
B Tronson with D Lloyd (First Defendant)
Solicitors:
Turner Freeman Lawyers (Plaintiff)
Rankin Ellison Lawyers (First Defendant)
NSW Crown Solicitor’s Office, Submitting Appearance (Second & Third Defendants)

File Number(s): 2020/230761
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

HER HONOUR: This is a judicial review of a decision of a delegate of the Registrar of the Workers Compensation Commission (“the Delegate”).
By summons filed 7 August 2020 the plaintiff seeks an order that the decision of the Delegate dated 7 May 2020 be quashed pursuant to s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) and that the Certificate of Determination issued by the Workers Compensation Commission of New South Wales (“the Commission”) on 11 June 2020 giving effect to the decision of the Delegate be set aside.
The plaintiff is Shirley Collins. The first defendant is Dux Manufacturing Ltd (“the insurer”). The second defendant is the Delegate. The third defendant is the Commission. The…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Collins v Dux Manufacturing 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2021] NSWSC 193
Decision Date: 02 March 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Collins v Dux Manufacturing Ltd, the plaintiff sought judicial review of a decision made by a delegate of the Registrar of the Workers Compensation Commission. The decision concerned whether an appeal to the Appeal Panel should be allowed to proceed. The plaintiff argued that the delegate had made several errors in determining his proposed grounds of appeal, including making decisions on a final and conclusory basis without providing adequate reasons. The court was required to determine whether the delegate's decision was legally sound and whether there were grounds for quashing the decision.

The central legal issue was whether the delegate had made an error of law in determining the plaintiff's proposed grounds of appeal. Specifically, the court needed to examine whether the delegate had provided adequate reasons for dismissing the plaintiff's appeal and whether the decision-making process was flawed. The court also needed to consider whether the delegate's findings were reasonable and whether there was any procedural unfairness in the decision-making process.

The court found that the delegate had indeed made errors of law in determining the plaintiff's proposed grounds of appeal. The court held that the delegate had not provided adequate reasons for dismissing the plaintiff's appeal and had made decisions on a final and conclusory basis. The court also found that the delegate's findings were unreasonable and that there had been procedural unfairness in the decision-making process. As a result, the court quashed the delegate's decision and remitted the matter back to the delegate for reconsideration.

The court ordered that the decision of the delegate be quashed and that the matter be remitted back to the delegate for reconsideration. The court also ordered that the delegate provide adequate reasons for any decisions made and that the decision-making process be fair and reasonable. The court emphasised the importance of providing adequate reasons for decisions and the need for decision-makers to follow a fair and reasonable process when making decisions.

Orders