Jamal v Nonabel Concrete Pty Ltd

The matter involved a dispute between Jamal, the appellant, and Nonabel Concrete Pty Ltd, the respondent. The issue was whether the appellant was dependent on the deceased worker, Mr. Ibrahim, for the purposes of claiming compensation under section 25(1)(a) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The appellant claimed that he was dependent on the deceased, while the respondent argued that the appellant was not dependent on the deceased and thus not entitled to compensation.

The court had to decide whether there was an error of fact in the determination made by the Workers Compensation Commission, which found that the appellant was not dependent on the deceased. The court examined the evidence presented before the Commission and the applicable legal principles. The court held that the Commission had not erred in finding that the appellant was not dependent on the deceased, as the evidence did not support a finding of dependency. The court found that the appellant had not established that he was wholly or substantially dependent on the deceased for support, as required by section 25(1)(a) of the Act.

In light of the above, the court confirmed the Certificate of Determination dated 22 May 2018, which found that the appellant was not dependent on the deceased. The court rejected the appellant's argument that there was an error of fact in the determination made by the Commission. The court held that the Commission's finding was supported by the evidence and that the appellant had not established that he was entitled to compensation under section 25(1)(a) of the Act. The court's decision was final and binding, and the appellant's appeal was dismissed.