Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Ltd

Jaffarie appealed against a determination of an Arbitrator which was made in proceedings brought under the Workers Compensation Act 1987. The appeal was brought against the employer, Quality Castings Pty Ltd. Jaffarie argued that the Arbitrator had erred in fact and law in assessing his entitlement to compensation and in the exercise of the discretion to award costs. Jaffarie sought an extension of time to appeal, the admission of fresh evidence on appeal and a re-hearing of the appeal. He also sought to have certain findings of the Arbitrator set aside on the basis of alleged errors in law and fact and to have the matter remitted to a different Arbitrator for re-determination. Jaffarie claimed that the Arbitrator had failed to properly exercise the discretion to award costs and that he had been denied procedural fairness in the conduct of the appeal. Jaffarie argued that the Arbitrator had erred in failing to properly consider fresh evidence and in failing to credit his evidence in the absence of cross-examination. Jaffarie submitted that the Arbitrator had failed to properly apply the principles set out in Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 and had made an error in fact in failing to refer to relevant evidence in tax records. Jaffarie submitted that the Arbitrator had erred in fact and law in finding that the effect of his injury had ceased and that he had been denied procedural fairness in the conduct of the appeal. The Court found that the appeal should be heard and that Jaffarie was entitled to an extension of time to appeal. The Court found that the Arbitrator had erred in failing to properly consider fresh evidence and in failing to credit Jaffarie’s evidence in the absence of cross-examination. The Court found that the Arbitrator had not properly applied the principles in Browne v Dunn (1893) 6R 67 and had failed to refer to relevant evidence in tax records. The Court found that Jaffarie had been denied procedural fairness in the conduct of the appeal and that the Arbitrator had erred in finding that the effect of Jaffarie’s injury had ceased. The Court found that Jaffarie had not been denied procedural fairness by the Arbitrator’s extempore decision, that the Arbitrator had not improperly alleged bias in considering medical evidence, that the Arbitrator had not improperly alleged bias in conducting the reconsideration application and that the failure to refer to relevant evidence in tax records had not affected the credit findings. The Court found that Jaffarie was not entitled to lump sum compensation and weekly compensation and that the Arbitrator had not erred in finding that the effect of Jaffarie’s injury had ceased. The Court found that the Arbitrator had not erred in exercising the discretion to award costs. The Court found that Jaffarie had failed to properly identify the grounds of appeal and had attempted to conduct the appeal as a re-hearing. The Court found that Jaffarie had failed to comply with Practice Direction No 6. The Court found that certain paragraphs of the Arbitrator’s determination should be revoked and the matter remitted to a different Arbitrator for re-determination. The Court found that other paragraphs of the Arbitrator’s determination should be confirmed. The Court found that the employer should pay Jaffarie’s costs of the appeal, incurred up to 19 November 2014, as agreed or assessed and that the costs of the second arbitration should follow the outcome of that arbitration.