Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd v Thoroughgood

Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales from a decision of the Deputy President of the Workers Compensation Commission. The dispute concerned a claim for workers' compensation by Mr. Thoroughgood, an employee of Inghams. The Deputy President had allowed Mr. Thoroughgood to depart from a concession made in earlier proceedings regarding the need to establish incapacity for a claim to be made.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Deputy President's decision, which was itself an appeal from an interlocutory decision of an arbitrator. Specifically, the court considered whether the Deputy President's decision was interlocutory, thus requiring leave to appeal under section 353 of the *Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998* (NSW). Further issues included whether a request for therapeutic footwear constituted a "claim for compensation" under section 261 of the *Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998* (NSW) and sections 59 and 60 of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* (NSW), and whether the Deputy President erred in permitting Mr. Thoroughgood to resile from his concession regarding the necessity of establishing incapacity for a claim. The court also considered the meaning of "incapacity" for the purposes of section 16(1)(a)(i) of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* (NSW).

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the Deputy President's decision was interlocutory because it did not finally determine the rights of the parties. Consequently, leave to appeal was required under section 353 of the *Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998* (NSW). The court found that the Deputy President had not erred in permitting Mr. Thoroughgood to depart from his concession, as the concession was based on a mistaken understanding of the law. The court also considered the definition of a "claim for compensation" and the meaning of "incapacity" in the context of the relevant legislation.

Leave to appeal was refused, and Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.