Ingram v Norco Co-operative Limited

APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BY AN ARBITRATOR
__________________________________________________________________

CITATION:	Stephen Albert Ingram v Norco Co-operative Limited [2003] NSWWCCPD 1
APPELLANT:	Stephen Albert Ingram (Applicant)
RESPONDENT:	Norco Co-operative Limited (Respondent)
INSURER:	QBE Workers Compensation (NSW) Limited
FILE NO:	WCC505–2002
DATE OF DECISION:	4 September, 2002
PRESIDENTIAL MEMBER:	Deputy President Gary Byron
DECISION UNDER APPEAL:	Award for the Respondent
DATE OF DECISION UNDER APPEAL:	14 January, 2003
HEARING:	Appeal determined on the papers
REPRESENTATION:	Appellant: Somerville Laundry Lomax, Lismore
Respondent: Mulcahy Lawyers, Lennox Head
ORDERS MADE ON APPEAL:	The Appeal is not allowed.  The decision appealed against is confirmed.  No order is made as to costs.

THE APPEAL

1. On 18 June, 2002, the Applicant, Stephen Albert Ingram (“the Appellant”) lodged with the Workers Compensation Commission (“the Commission”) an Application to resolve a dispute.  The Appellant claimed to have sustained an injury to his foot on 22 May, 2001 when his foot was run over by a forklift while he was present at his place of employment at a time when he was on approved recreation leave.  The basis of his claim is that he suffered non-economic loss as a result of the injury that arose out of and in the course of his employment with the Norco Co-operative Limited (“the Respondent”).  The insurer is QBE Workers Compensation (NSW) Limited (“the Insurer”).

2. The Appellant notifed the Respondent of the injury and a  Compulsory Third Party Claim was made to NRMA Insurance.  The claim was accepted by NRMA and Mr. Ingram was reimbursed lost wages.

3. Mr. Ingram lodged a claim with the Insurer in this matter on 15 February, 2002 in the sum of $5,600 for compensation for non-economic loss. A claim for medical expenses was also lodged but that claim was not quantified. The Respondent disputed liability pursuant to section 281 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (“the Act”).

4. The Act provides at section 354(6) that if the Commission is satisfied that sufficient information has been supplied to it in connection with proceedings, it may exercise functions under the Act without holding any conference or formal hearing. The parties agreed that the Commission, constituted by the Arbitrator, should proceed to determine the dispute without a conference or formal hearing, that is, “on the papers”. Accordingly, the Arbitrator having satisfied himself in accordance with the section and being satisfied “that the parties to the dispute understand the nature of the application and the legal implications of any assertion made in the information supplied”, proceeded to determine the dispute “on the papers”.  On 4 September, 2002 the Arbitrator found that the Appellant did not receive an injury on 22 May, 2001, arising out of or in the course of his employment with the Respondent, and further that the Appellant’s employment was not a substantial contributing factor to his injury.  Accordingly, an award was made in favour of the Respondent.

5. The Appellant lodged an Application for Leave to Appeal against the Arbitrator’s decision on 20 September, 2002…