Ellavale Engineering Pty Ltd v Pilgrim

Case [2005] NSWCA 272
CITATION:

ELLAVALE ENGINEERING PTY. LIMITED v. PILGRIM [2005] NSWCA 272
HEARING DATE(S):

23/02/05
 
JUDGMENT DATE: 


19 August 2005

JUDGMENT OF:

Handley JA at 1; Beazley JA at 18; Campbell AJA at 93
DECISION:

Appeal dismissed with costs
CATCHWORDS:

WORKERS COMPENSATION - coal miners - Schedule 6 Part 18 Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) - Coal Mines Regulation Act 1982 (NSW) - whether respondent a "coal miner" - whether respondent employed "in or about a coal mine" - STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION - relevant principles - whether words should be implied into a statutory provision - Schedule 6 Part 18 Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW)
LEGISLATION CITED:

Coal Industry Act 2001 (NSW)
Coal Mines Regulation Act 1982 (NSW)
Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW)
Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW)
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW)
CASES CITED:

Bermingham v Corrective Services Commission of New South Wales [1988] 15 NSWLR 292
Collector of Customs v Bell Basic Industries Ltd (1988) 20 FCR 146
Commonwealth v Lyon (1979) 24 ALR 300
Commonwealth v Oliver (1962) 107 CLR 353
Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) Pty Limited v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1981) 147 CLR 297
Delaney v Staples [1992] 1 AC 687
Griffin v Houlder Line Ltd [1904] 1 KB 510
Hope v Bathurst City Council (1980) 144 CLR 1
Jones v Wrotham Park Settled Estates [1980] AC 74
Kingston v Keprose Pty Limited (No.3) (1987) 11 NSWLR 404
Meadows v Ellerman Lines Ltd [1920] 3 KB 544
New South Wales Associated Blue-Metal Quarries Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1956) 94 CLR 509
Owens v Campbell Limited [1904] 2 KB 60
Pfeiffer v Stevens (2001) 209 CLR 57
Police v Thomson [1966] NZLR 813
Project Blue Sky Inc & Ors v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355
Roberts v Fuchs Lubricants (Australasia) Pty Limited (2002) 24 NSWCCR 125
Staging Connections Pty Limited v WorkCover Authority of New South Wales [2004] NSWCA 357
PARTIES:

Ellavale Engineering Pty. Limited (Appellant)
Dean Pilgrim (Respondent)

FILE NUMBER(S):

CA 40209/04
COUNSEL:

L. King SC/L. Stone (Appellant)
A. Katzmann SC/T. Edwards (Respondent)
SOLICITORS:

Rankin & Nathan (Newcastle)
Bale Boshev (Newcastle)

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:

District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):

3650/01; RJ03650/01

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:

Maguire CCJ; Truss DCJ



                          CA 40209/04
                          CC 3650/01

                          HANDLEY JA
                          BEAZLEY JA
                          CAMPBELL AJA

                          19 August 2005

ELLAVALE ENGINEERING PTY LIMITED v PILGRIM

Headnote

The respondent was employed by the appellant as a leading hand fitter and turner. He was required to attend upon various jobs for which the appellant was contracted, a significant proportion of which were based at coal mine sites. The respondent was injured when, in the course of carrying out maintenance on equipment at a coal mine with which the appellant company had contracted to provide engineering services, he was crushed between two vehicles.

Schedule 6 Part 18 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) (WCA) preserves beneficial compensation entitlements for persons employed “in or about a coal mine to which the Coal Mines Regulation Act 1982 applies”. Neither the WCA nor…

Continue reading Ellavale Engineering Pty Ltd v Pilgrim

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Ellavale Engineering Pty Ltd v Pilgrim [2005] NSWCA 272
Case
[2005] NSWCA 272
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Ellavale Engineering Pty Ltd appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against a decision of the Workers Compensation Commission. The dispute concerned whether the respondent, Mr. Pilgrim, was a "coal miner" for the purposes of Schedule 6 Part 18 of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* (NSW), and consequently whether he was entitled to compensation under that provision. The core of the disagreement lay in the interpretation of the definition of a coal miner and the scope of employment "in or about a coal mine" as contemplated by the legislation.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether Mr. Pilgrim's employment activities satisfied the definition of a "coal miner" as defined or implied by the relevant statutory provisions, including the *Coal Mines Regulation Act 1982* (NSW). Secondly, the court had to consider whether Mr. Pilgrim's work was sufficiently connected to a coal mine to be considered employment "in or about a coal mine" for the purposes of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* (NSW). This involved a close examination of the statutory language and the principles of statutory construction.

In its reasoning, the Court of Appeal applied established principles of statutory interpretation, focusing on the ordinary meaning of the words used in Schedule 6 Part 18 of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* (NSW) and the *Coal Mines Regulation Act 1982* (NSW). The court considered whether it was necessary or permissible to imply words into the statutory provisions to give effect to the legislative intent. Ultimately, the court found that Mr. Pilgrim's role and the nature of his work did not bring him within the scope of the definition of a coal miner or employment "in or about a coal mine" as intended by the legislation. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed with costs

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.