Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Ltd

Link copied
Case Copied 43 min read
WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION
DETERMINATION OF APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BY AN ARBITRATOR
Status: Appeal to the Court of Appeal dismissed on 27 April 2018 – Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCA 88
CITATION: Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Limited [2017] NSWWCCPD 2
APPELLANT: Sayed Akbar Jaffarie
RESPONDENT: Quality Castings Pty Limited
INSURER: QBE Workers Compensation (NSW) Limited
FILE NUMBER: A3 and A4 10946/12
SENIOR ARBITRATOR: Ms Catherine McDonald
DATE OF ARBITRATOR’S DECISIONS: 1 July 2016; 5 August 2016
DATE OF APPEAL DECISION: 28 February 2017
SUBJECT MATTER OF DECISION: Admission of fresh evidence pursuant to s 352(6) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (the 1998 Act); roles of arbitrators and approved medical specialists – Bindah v Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 264; 13 DDCR 156 and associated decisions; medical evidence – Hancock v East Coast Timber Products Pty Limited [2011] NSWCA 11; 80 NSWLR 43; 8 DDCR 399, party bound by concessions of counsel – Smits v Roach [2006] HCA 36; 80 ALJR 1309; 227 CLR 423; 228 ALR 262 , Sch 6 costs on remitter, s 350(3) of the 1998 Act – the nature of the reconsideration power
PRESIDENTIAL MEMBER: Acting President Michael Snell
HEARING: On the papers
REPRESENTATION: Appellant: Self-represented
Respondent: Sparke Helmore Lawyers
ORDERS MADE ON APPEAL:

1.     The Senior Arbitrator’s determinations dated 1 July 2016 and 5 August 2016 are confirmed.

2.     No order as to costs.

INTRODUCTION

  1. Sayed Akbar Jaffarie (the appellant) allegedly injured his back lifting in the course of his employment with Quality Castings Pty Ltd (the respondent) on 12 June 2009. The resultant proceedings have involved a decision by a Commission arbitrator, on 17 February 2014, followed by a reconsideration of that decision by the Arbitrator, dated 10 June 2014 (in which he refused the reconsideration application). The appellant appealed to a Presidential member, whose decision was dated 9 December 2014 (Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Ltd [2014] NSWWCCPD 79 [the earlier Presidential decision]). This was followed by an appeal to the Court of Appeal, in which the appeal was allowed in a decision dated 29 October 2015, and the matter remitted for re-determination by a different arbitrator (Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 335 [the Court of Appeal decision]).

  2. The matter came before a Senior Arbitrator on the order for remitter, and was heard on 23 May 2016. A Certificate of Determination was issued dated 1 July 2016. The appellant again lodged an application for reconsideration. The Senior Arbitrator issued a Certificate of Determination (declining that application) dated 5 August 2016.

  3. The appellant has now lodged further appeals to a Presidential member, against the decisions dated 1 July 2016 and 5 August 2016.

BACKGROUND

  1. There is a helpful summary of the factual background in the earlier Presidential decision at [4]-[8], from which the following is largely taken. The appellant was born in Afghanistan in 1987. He came…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Ltd 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
[2017] NSWWCCPD 2
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Ltd involved a dispute between an employee and his employer regarding workers' compensation claims. The case was heard in the Industrial Division of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The employee, Jaffarie, sought to have his claim for additional compensation allowed, while the employer, Quality Castings, argued against it. The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Senior Arbitrator's decisions were correct and whether fresh evidence should have been admitted under section 352(6) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998.

The court examined the roles of arbitrators and approved medical specialists, referencing the decision in Bindah v Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd. It also considered the admissibility of medical evidence in light of Hancock v East Coast Timber Products Pty Limited. Additionally, the court noted the principle that a party is bound by the concessions of their counsel as established in Smits v Roach. The court ultimately found that the Senior Arbitrator's decisions were sound and that the employer had not demonstrated any error warranting intervention. As such, the court confirmed the determinations made by the Senior Arbitrator.

In conclusion, the court confirmed the Senior Arbitrator's decisions and found no grounds for ordering costs. The legal principles applied in the decision reinforced the roles of arbitrators and the admissibility of evidence in workers' compensation matters, providing clarity on the application of these principles in future cases.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The Senior Arbitrator’s determinations dated 1 July 2016 and 5 August 2016 are confirmed.

2. No order as to costs.

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.