HAWKER PACIFIC PTY LTD -v- LANG [2014] WADC 104

Jurisdiction:	DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2014] WADC 104
Case No:	APP:6/2014	Heard:	4 JUNE 2014
Coram:	EATON DCJ	Delivered:	15/08/14
Location:	PERTH
No of pages:	12	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeal dismissed. Leave refused.
PDF Version

Parties:	HAWKER PACIFIC PTY LTD MARY COLLEEN LANG
Catchwords:	Appeal from decision of WorkCover arbitrator Whether errors of law were made by the arbitrator Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981
Case References:	Catholic Education Office of WA v Granitto [2012] WASCA 266 Ewart v Caruso [2013] WASCA 266 Paridis v Settlement Agents Supervisory Board [2007] WASCA 97; (2007) 33 WAR 361

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

LOCATION : PERTH CITATION : HAWKER PACIFIC PTY LTD -v- LANG [2014] WADC 104 CORAM : EATON DCJ HEARD : 4 JUNE 2014 DELIVERED : 15 AUGUST 2014 FILE NO/S : APP 6 of 2014 BETWEEN : HAWKER PACIFIC PTY LTD

Appellant

AND

MARY COLLEEN LANG

Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

For File No : APP 6 of 2014

Jurisdiction : WORKCOVER WA

Coram : ARBITRATOR POWLES

Catchwords:

Appeal from decision of WorkCover arbitrator - Whether errors of law were made by the arbitrator - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981

Result:

Appeal dismissed. Leave refused.

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : Mr J P Wilson

Respondent : Mr B L Nugawela

Solicitors:

Appellant : WHL Legal Pty Ltd

Respondent : Shine Lawyers

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Catholic Education Office of WA v Granitto [2012] WASCA 266
Ewart v Caruso [2013] WASCA 266
Paridis v Settlement Agents Supervisory Board [2007] WASCA 97; (2007) 33 WAR 361

1 EATON DCJ: On 21 January 2014 Hawker Pacific Pty Ltd (the appellant) filed a notice of appeal in this court seeking leave to appeal against the decision of Arbitrator Powles published on 24 December 2013 in the Arbitration Service of WorkCover WA. In that matter the applicant was one Mary Colleen Lang and the respondent was Hawker Pacific Pty Ltd. Pursuant to the arbitrator's decision, an order was made that Hawker Pacific Pty Ltd pay Ms Lang's cl 17 expenses for left wrist fusion surgery to be performed by Mr Jeff Ecker.

2 Section 247 of the Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 provides that if written reasons for an arbitrator's decision under pt XI of that Act in respect of a dispute are given to a party, the party may, with leave, appeal to this court against the decision. This court is not to grant leave unless:

(a) in the case of an appeal in which an amount of compensation is at issue –

(i) a question of law is involved and the amount of that issue in the appeal is both –

(I) at least $5,000 or such other amount as may be prescribed by the regulation; and

(II) at least 20% of the amount awarded in…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Hawker Pacific Pty Ltd v Lang 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: [2014] WADC 104
Decision Date: 15 AUGUST 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Hawker Pacific Pty Ltd v Lang was heard in the court of appeal. The primary matter in dispute was whether there had been errors of law made by the WorkCover arbitrator in their decision. The appeal arose from the arbitrator's decision, which had been made in the first instance. The legal issues that the court was required to decide were centred around the interpretation and application of relevant legislation and case law by the arbitrator, specifically whether the arbitrator had correctly identified and applied the appropriate legal principles in making their determination.

The court found that the arbitrator had not made any errors of law in their decision. They thoroughly examined the evidence and the applicable legal principles, and determined that the arbitrator had correctly applied the relevant legislation and case law to the facts of the case. The court also noted that the arbitrator had carefully considered the submissions made by both parties and had given appropriate weight to the evidence presented. In light of this, the court dismissed the appeal and refused leave to appeal to a higher court.

In dismissing the appeal, the court emphasised the importance of the principle that an appellate court should only intervene in a decision of a lower court if there has been a clear error of law. The court found that the arbitrator had not made any such error, and therefore the decision of the arbitrator should stand. The final orders of the court were that the appeal be dismissed and that leave to appeal to a higher court be refused.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed. Leave refused.

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.