Workers' Compensation (Cth) - Causal relation between injury and incapacity - New intervening force - Causal relation not necessarily terminated - Circumstances specified in s.7(6) of the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 held not the only circumstances in which causal relation not terminated.
Workers' Compensation (Cth) - Entitlement and liability - "wilful and false representation" that employee had not previously suffered from a disease - Absence of belief in truth of representation required by "wilful".
Australian Telecommunications Commission v. Tzikas (1985) 5 A.A.R. 173 Commission for the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation of Commonwealth Employees v. Hall (1993) 41 F.C.R. 508 Commonwealth v. Christoffelsz (1988) 18 F.C.R. 415 Commonwealth v. Hornsby (1960) 103 C.L.R. 588 Commonwealth v. Johnston (1980) 31 A.L.R. 445 Commonwealth v. Whillock (1983) 70 F.L.R. 292 Garner v. Burns Philp & Co. Ltd. (1949) 49 S.R.(N.S.W.) 270 Iannella v. French (1968) 119 C.L.R. 84 Halsbury (4th ed.) vol. 31 Lindeman Ltd. v. Colvin (1947) 74 C.L.R. 313 McLaughlin & Co. Pty. Ltd. v. Brinnand [1965] W.C.R. 112 Migge v. Wormald Industries Ltd. [1972] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 29 Owens v. Australian Postal Corporation (F.C.A. VG No. 510 of 1992; unreported, judgment 6 July 1994) Rosmini v. Chrysler Australia Ltd. (1973) 6 S.A.S.R. 212 The Darling Island Stevedoring and Lighterage Co. Ltd. v. Hankinson (1967) 117 C.L.R. 19 The Queen v. Aspinall (1876) 2 Q.B.D. 48
COMCARE AUSTRALIA v. GEORGE LESLIE PORTER VG189 of 1995
Jenkinson J. Melbourne 11 July, 1996
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. VG189 of 1995 GENERAL DIVISION )
On Appeal from the General Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal constituted by Senior Member Mrs. J. R. Dwyer and Members Mr. W. G. McLean and Miss E. A. Shanahan.
BETWEEN:COMCARE AUSTRALIA
Applicant
AND:GEORGE LESLIE PORTER
Respondent
CORAM: Jenkinson J.
PLACE: Melbourne
DATE: 11 July, 1996
MINUTES OF ORDER
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The appeal be dismissed.
The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.
(Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.)
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. VG189 of 1995 GENERAL DIVISION )
On Appeal from the General Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal constituted by Senior Member Mrs. J. R. Dwyer and Members Mr. W. G. McLean and Miss E. A. Shanahan.
BETWEEN:COMCARE AUSTRALIA
Applicant
AND:GEORGE LESLIE PORTER
Respondent
CORAM: Jenkinson J.
PLACE: Melbourne
DATE: 11 July, 1996
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Appeal from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal that the respondent is entitled to compensation under the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988.
The respondent was found by the Tribunal to have suffered on 10 December 1993 a "frank rupture" of the intervertebral disc between his fourth and fifth lumbar vertebrae ("the L 4/5 disc"), and the Tribunal found that incapacity for work resulted from…
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.
Continue reading Comcare v Porter
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Comcare v Porter [1996] FCA 562
Case
[1996] FCA 562
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Comcare Australia sought to appeal a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal that George Leslie Porter was entitled to compensation under the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988. Porter had suffered a "frank rupture" of the intervertebral disc between his fourth and fifth lumbar vertebrae, which resulted in incapacity for work. The Tribunal found that an injury suffered by Porter on 7 July 1984 had resulted in the incapacity that commenced on 10 December 1993. The appeal hinged on whether the causal relationship between the injury and the incapacity was broken by an intervening force. The court found that the causal relationship was not necessarily terminated by the intervening force, and that the circumstances specified in section 7(6) of the 1988 Act were not the only circumstances in which the causal relation would not be terminated. The court also found that a "wilful and false representation" that Porter had not previously suffered from a disease required the absence of belief in the truth of the representation. The appeal was dismissed with costs.