Lambropoulos v Qantas Airways Limited

Link copied
Case Copied 15 min read
DETERMINATION OF APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BY AN ARBITRATOR
CITATION: Lambropoulos v Qantas Airways Limited [2019] NSWWCCPD 17
APPELLANT: George Lambropoulos
RESPONDENT: Qantas Airways Limited
INSURER: Self-insured
FILE NUMBER: A1-4132/18
ARBITRATOR: Mr G Egan
DATE OF ARBITRATOR’S DECISION: 2 November 2018
DATE OF APPEAL DECISION: 3 May 2019
SUBJECT MATTER OF DECISION: Admission of additional documents – CHEP Australia Limited v Strickland [2013] NSWCA 351; 12 DDCR 501 applied; monetary threshold required by s 352(3) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; application of Abu-Ali v Martin-Brower Australia Pty Ltd [2017] NSWWCCPD 25, Anderson v Secretary, Department of Education [2018] NSWWCCPD 32
PRESIDENTIAL MEMBER: Deputy President Elizabeth Wood
HEARING: On the papers
REPRESENTATION: Appellant: Self-represented
Respondent: HWL Ebsworth

ORDERS MADE ON APPEAL:

1.     The monetary thresholds in s 352(3) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 are not satisfied, and there is no right of appeal.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

  1. Mr George Lambropoulos (the appellant) was employed by Qantas Airways Limited (the respondent) as a Ramp Officer, and was required to load cargo and luggage onto and off planes.

  2. The appellant was injured on 3 July 2010 when he was pulling trailers with a “tug” vehicle, which was struck from behind by another large vehicle. The appellant’s vehicle was stationary at the time, as he was giving way to a plane. Liability for injury to the cervical and thoracic spines was ultimately accepted by the respondent, as well as liability for gastrointestinal symptoms that arose as a consequence of the ingestion of medication taken in respect of the accepted injuries.

  3. In these proceedings, the appellant applied for an assessment by an Approved Medical Specialist (AMS) in order to be assessed for the purposes of ascertaining whether he suffered from a whole person impairment of greater than 20%, which would entitle him to claim continuing weekly payments beyond the first 260 weeks of weekly compensation, pursuant to s 39 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the 1987 Act).

  4. The injury was described in Part 4 of the Application for Assessment by an Approved Medical Specialist (the Application), and included whiplash injury, injury to the cervical spine, thoracic spine, right shoulder, right arm, right hand, left shoulder, left arm, left hand and gastro-intestinal tract.

  5. The respondent disputed liability for the left and right shoulders and any consequential condition in respect of the appellant’s reproductive organs.

  6. The matter proceeded to arbitration on 30 October 2018, at which time the appellant was represented by counsel and an instructing solicitor.

  7. At the arbitration, the appellant applied to have a bundle of documents admitted under cover of an Application to Admit Late Documents dated 24 October 2018 (the AALD). The Arbitrator declined to admit the documents, except for a clinical note from Immex Green Square Medical Centre, which contained a clinical attendance note dated 3 July 2010.

  8. The Arbitrator determined that he was not satisfied the appellant had suffered injury to either shoulder,…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Lambropoulos v Qantas Airways Limited 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
[2019] NSWWCCPD 17
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Lambropoulos v Qantas Airways Limited was heard by the Industrial Division of the NSW Supreme Court. The applicant, Mr Lambropoulos, sought to admit additional documents into the proceedings which were not initially part of the evidence. The respondent, Qantas Airways Limited, opposed this application on the grounds that the documents were not relevant and did not satisfy the monetary threshold required by the relevant statute. The nature of the dispute was essentially procedural, centering on the admissibility of additional evidence.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the monetary thresholds specified in section 352(3) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 were satisfied, which would allow for the admission of additional documents. The court had to consider previous cases such as CHEP Australia Limited v Strickland, Abu-Ali v Martin-Brower Australia Pty Ltd, and Anderson v Secretary, Department of Education to determine the appropriate application of the statutory provisions. The court also needed to assess whether the additional documents were relevant and necessary to the proceedings.

The court found that the monetary thresholds under section 352(3) of the Act were not satisfied. This conclusion was based on a careful examination of the statutory language and its interpretation in light of the cited cases. The court held that the additional documents did not meet the requirements for admissibility as they did not contribute to resolving the issues at hand. Consequently, the application to admit the additional documents was dismissed, and the court determined there was no right of appeal under the circumstances.

The final order of the court was that the monetary thresholds in section 352(3) of the Act were not satisfied, and the application to admit additional documents was dismissed. Furthermore, the court declared that there was no right of appeal from this decision.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The monetary thresholds in s 352(3) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 are not satisfied, and there is no right of appeal.

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.