EML as agent for Insurance for NSW v AAI Limited t/as GIO

EML, acting as agent for Insurance for New South Wales, filed an appeal against AAI Limited trading as GIO in relation to a dispute concerning the apportionment of liability for weekly payments under Sections 22 and 22A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. The primary issue revolved around whether an Arbitrator was obligated to adhere to a previously agreed-upon apportionment of liability for both treatment expenses as per Section 60 and entitlements as per Section 66 of the Act. The appeal further questioned the adequacy of the reasons provided by the Arbitrator and sought to determine whether the decision was illogical or irrational.

The court had to consider whether the Arbitrator was bound by the earlier apportionment agreements and if these agreements could be distinguished between treatment expenses and entitlements. The court also examined the necessity for detailed reasons to justify the decision, referencing cases such as Precision Valve Australia Pty Ltd v Nanda and Beale v Government Insurance Office (NSW). The reasoning extended to whether the decision was illogical or irrational, drawing on principles from Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZMDS.

The court concluded that the Arbitrator was not bound by the earlier apportionment agreements for treatment expenses and entitlements and that the reasons provided were adequate. The decision was neither illogical nor irrational, and thus the Amended Certificate of Determination dated 3 June 2019 was confirmed. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.