Cram Fluid Power Pty Ltd v Green

Link copied
Case Copied 52 min read

Court of Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Cram Fluid Power Pty Ltd v Green [2015] NSWCA 250
Hearing dates:30 June 2015
Decision date: 27 August 2015
Before: Beazley ACJ at [1];
Emmett JA at [2];
Gleeson JA at [13]
Decision:

1.   Dismiss the respondent’s notice of motion dated 30 June 2015.
2.   Grant leave to appeal.
3.   Direct the applicant to file a notice of appeal in the form of the draft contained within the White Book within 14 days.
4.   Appeal allowed.
5.   Set aside the orders in the Commission below, and in place order:
(a)   the appeal from the decision of the Arbitrator is upheld;
(b)   the decision of the Arbitrator made on 7 August 2014, and confirmed by written notice dated 8 August 2014, is revoked;
(c)   the Commission notes that the respondent worker (Mr Green) has no entitlement to pursue his claim for further permanent impairment compensation;
(d)   the respondent worker’s claim filed 3 March 2014 for further permanent impairment compensation is dismissed.
6.   The respondent to pay the appellant’s costs in this Court.

Catchwords:

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION – entitlement to lump sum compensation for permanent impairment – Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) (1987 Act) s 66, and Sch 6, Pt 19H, cl 15 – Workers Compensation Regulation 2010 (NSW) Sch 8, cl 11 – one claim limitation in s 66(1A) of the 1987 Act introduced with effect on and after 19 June 2012 (Critical Date) – whether claim for lump sum compensation made prior to Critical Date distinct from further claim made after Critical Date – whether cl 15 of transitional provisions had effect that one claim limitation applies to claim for lump sum compensation made on or after Critical Date – whether cl 11 of transitional regulations had effect that making earlier claim for lump sum compensation (which had been resolved) excluded one claim limitation in respect of further claim made on or after Critical Date

 

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION – ss 66(1A) and 66A(3)(c) of the 1987 Act – whether s 66A(3)(c) permits further claim for lump sum compensation after Critical Date additional to that payable under a complying agreement made prior to Critical Date – Commission’s power to award additional compensation under s 66A(3)(c) dependent upon worker’s entitlement to claim under s 66 as amended

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION – meaning of “one claim” in s 66(1A) of the 1987 Act – whether “one claim” means one further claim for lump sum compensation on or after Critical Date – one claim limitation operates on facts antecedent to Critical Date
Legislation Cited: Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW) s 34(1)(a)
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 75A(8)
Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) ss 2A, 4, 9, 17, 66, 66A, 67, Sch 6 Pt 19H cls 3, 15
Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment Act 2012 (NSW) Sch 12
Workers Compensation Amendment (Miscellaneous) Regulation 2012 (NSW)
Workers Compensation Amendment (Transitional) Regulation 2012 (NSW)
Workers Compensation Regulation 2010 (NSW) Sch 8 cl 11
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation…
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Cram Fluid Power Pty Ltd v Green 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
[2015] NSWCA 250
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Court of Appeal, the applicant, Cram Fluid Power Pty Ltd, appealed against orders made by the Workers Compensation Commission. The dispute concerned the respondent worker's entitlement to claim lump sum compensation for permanent impairment under the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* (NSW) (the 1987 Act), particularly in light of amendments introduced on 19 June 2012 (the Critical Date). The core of the disagreement revolved around whether the worker's earlier claim for lump sum compensation, resolved prior to the Critical Date, precluded a further claim made after that date, given the introduction of a "one claim" limitation.

The court was required to determine several legal issues. These included whether a claim for lump sum compensation made before the Critical Date was distinct from a further claim made after it. The court also had to consider the effect of transitional provisions, specifically clause 15 of Schedule 6, Part 19H of the 1987 Act and clause 11 of Schedule 8 of the *Workers Compensation Regulation 2010* (NSW), on the application of the one-claim limitation to claims made on or after the Critical Date. Furthermore, the court examined whether section 66A(3)(c) of the 1987 Act permitted a further claim for lump sum compensation after the Critical Date, additional to that payable under a complying agreement made before that date, and what the meaning of "one claim" in section 66(1A) of the 1987 Act was in this context.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the one-claim limitation introduced by section 66(1A) of the 1987 Act operated on facts antecedent to the Critical Date. It held that the transitional provisions did not preserve an entitlement to make a further claim for lump sum compensation after the Critical Date if an earlier claim had already been made and resolved. The court found that the worker's earlier claim, having been resolved before the Critical Date, meant that the "one claim" limitation applied to any subsequent claim made after that date. Consequently, the worker had no entitlement to pursue a further claim for permanent impairment compensation.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the Commission below, and ordered that the respondent worker had no entitlement to pursue his claim for further permanent impairment compensation, dismissing his claim filed on 3 March 2014. The respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Dismiss the respondent’s notice of motion dated 30 June 2015.

2. Grant leave to appeal.

3. Direct the applicant to file a notice of appeal in the form of the draft contained within the White Book within 14 days.

4. Appeal allowed.

5. Set aside the orders in the Commission below, and in place order:

(a) the appeal from the decision of the Arbitrator is upheld;

(b) the decision of the Arbitrator made on 7 August 2014, and confirmed by written notice dated 8 August 2014, is revoked;

(c) the Commission notes that the respondent worker (Mr Green) has no entitlement to pursue his claim for further permanent impairment compensation;

(d) the respondent worker’s claim filed 3 March 2014 for further permanent impairment compensation is dismissed.

6. The respondent to pay the appellant’s costs in this Court.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.