HAWKER PACIFIC PTY LTD -v- LANG [2015] WASCA 256

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2015] WASCA 256
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:	CACV:102/2014	Heard:	15 JUNE 2015 & FINAL WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS 30 NOVEMBER 2015
Coram:	BUSS JA NEWNES JA MAZZA JA	Delivered:	22/12/15
No of pages:	26	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Leave to appeal granted Appeal allowed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	HAWKER PACIFIC PTY LTD MARY COLLEEN LANG
Catchwords:	Workers' compensation Respondent suffered compensable injury in 2007 Further alleged injury in 2009 No claim for compensation made for 2009 injury Claim by respondent for expenses of left wrist fusion surgery Whether arbitrator erred in finding necessary connection between 2007 injury and proposed wrist fusion surgery No evidence of any connection Proceedings before arbitrator not conducted on basis that 2009 injury was part of respondent's claim Need for adequate explanation of medical terminology
Legislation:	Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA), s 5(1), s 254, cl 17(1) of sch 1
Case References:	Atanasoska v Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd [2009] WASCA 17 BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd v Brady [2008] WASCA 250 Kostas v HIA Insurance Services Pty Ltd [2010] HCA 32; (2010) 241 CLR 390 Napier v BHP Billiton (Worsley Alumina) Pty Ltd [2015] WASCA 230

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : HAWKER PACIFIC PTY LTD -v- LANG [2015] WASCA 256 CORAM : BUSS JA

NEWNES JA

MAZZA JA

HEARD : 15 JUNE 2015 & FINAL WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS 30 NOVEMBER 2015 DELIVERED : 22 DECEMBER 2015 FILE NO/S : CACV 102 of 2014 BETWEEN : HAWKER PACIFIC PTY LTD

Appellant

AND

MARY COLLEEN LANG

Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : EATON DCJ

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

File No : APP 6 of 2014

Catchwords:

Workers' compensation - Respondent suffered compensable injury in 2007 - Further alleged injury in 2009 - No claim for compensation made for 2009 injury - Claim by respondent for expenses of left wrist fusion surgery - Whether arbitrator erred in finding necessary connection between 2007 injury and proposed wrist fusion surgery - No evidence of any connection - Proceedings before arbitrator not conducted on basis that 2009 injury was part of respondent's claim - Need for adequate explanation of medical terminology

Legislation:

Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA), s 5(1), s 254, cl 17(1) of sch 1

Result:

Leave to appeal granted

Appeal allowed

Category: B

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):

Atanasoska v Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd [2009] WASCA 17
BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd v Brady [2008] WASCA 250
Kostas v HIA Insurance Services Pty Ltd [2010] HCA 32; (2010) 241 CLR 390
Napier v BHP Billiton (Worsley Alumina)…

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: [2015] WASCA 256
Decision Date: 22 DECEMBER 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Hawker Pacific Pty Ltd appealed against an arbitrator's decision in which it was found liable to pay compensation to an employee, Mr Lang. Mr Lang had sustained a compensable injury in 2007 and underwent surgery on his left wrist in 2009. He did not make a claim for compensation in respect of the 2009 injury. The employer was found liable for the costs of the 2009 surgery by the arbitrator. The employer appealed against this finding, arguing that there was no necessary connection between the 2007 injury and the 2009 surgery. The employer also argued that the arbitrator had erred in his understanding of the medical evidence. The court was required to determine whether the employer was liable to pay for the costs of the 2009 surgery.

The court found that the employer was not liable to pay for the costs of the 2009 surgery. There was no evidence that the 2007 injury had any necessary connection with the 2009 surgery. The court noted that the proceedings before the arbitrator were not conducted on the basis that the 2009 injury was part of Mr Lang's claim. The court also found that the arbitrator had misunderstood the medical evidence, as there was no evidence of a causal link between the 2007 injury and the 2009 surgery. The court found that the employer was not liable to pay for the costs of the 2009 surgery.

The appeal was allowed, and the decision of the arbitrator was set aside. The matter was remitted to the arbitrator for rehearing in light of the findings of the court. The court found that the employer was not liable to pay for the costs of the 2009 surgery, as there was no necessary connection between the 2007 injury and the 2009 surgery. The court also found that the arbitrator had misunderstood the medical evidence. The employer was not liable to pay for the costs of the 2009 surgery.

Orders

Orders of the court

Leave to appeal granted

Appeal allowed

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.