Comcare v Filla

[2002] FCAFC 61

Comcare v Filla [2002] FCAFC 61

Comcare v Filla [2002] FCA 286

NOTE: CHANGES TO THE MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION (MNC)

The Federal Court adopted a new medium neutral citation (FCAFC) for Full Court judgments effective from 1 January 2002.  Single Judge judgments will not be affected and will retain the FCA medium neutral citation.

The transitional arrangements are as follows:

• All Full Court judgments delivered prior to 1 January 2002 will retain the FCA medium neutral citation.
• All Full Court judgments delivered between 1 January 2002 to 30 April 2002 have been assigned parallel medium neutral citations in both the FCA and FCAFC series. 
• All Full Court judgments delivered from 1 May 2002 will contain the FCAFC medium neutral citation only.

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Comcare v Filla [2002] FCA 286

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – whether the primary judge erred in law in misconstruing the interpretation of s 24(1) of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) – permanent impairment – mitigation of damages – whether the unreasonable refusal of treatment disentitles the worker to worker’s compensation payment – whether reasonable rehabilitative treatment exists for the particular impairment, the permanence of which is under consideration, having regard to the circumstances of the case and whether the employee has undertaken all of it

Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth), s 24
Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 24

Driclad Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1966-1968) 121 CLR 45
Fazlic v Milingimbi Community Inc (1981-1982) 150 CLR 345

COMCARE AUSTRALIA v EVA FILLA

No N 1195 of 2001

SPENDER, R.D. NICHOLSON, NORTH JJ
BRISBANE (heard in Sydney)
19 MARCH 2002

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 1195 OF 2001

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	COMCARE AUSTRALIA APPELLANT
AND:	EVA FILLA RESPONDENT
JUDGES:	SPENDER, R.D. NICHOLSON, NORTH JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	19 MARCH 2002
WHERE MADE:	BRISBANE (heard in Sydney)

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.   The appeal be dismissed.

2.   The appellant pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal, to be taxed if not agreed.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 1195 OF 2001

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	COMCARE AUSTRALIA APPELLANT
AND:	EVA FILLA RESPONDENT

JUDGES:	SPENDER, R.D. NICHOLSON, NORTH JJ
DATE:	19 MARCH 2002
PLACE:	BRISBANE (heard in Sydney)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

1. This is an appeal from the judgment of a single judge of this court (Katz J) who set aside a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) affirming a decision by the appellant (Comcare) that the respondent, Eva Filla, a Commonwealth employee, was not entitled to compensation which she had claimed under s 24(1) of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (the SRC Act). The primary judge further ordered:

   “… 2.  The case be…