Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Limited v Hooper

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal. The applicant was Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Limited, represented by Mr C.G. Gee, QC, and the respondent was Hooper, represented by Mr D.F. Jackson, QC. The dispute concerned a point of law that had been the subject of a recent judgment in the High Court in *Workers' Compensation Board of Queensland v Technical Products Pty Ltd*. The applicant sought to rely on this judgment, but the court noted that the relevant legislation had since been changed.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the applicant's point of law, as it stood prior to the legislative amendment, was still a live issue or an obstacle to the application for special leave. The applicant also sought to demonstrate the potential impact of the point at issue by referring to a Supreme Court decision, *Croker v Haines*, which dealt with the number of jury cases awaiting hearing. This was presented to show the potential breadth of cases that could be affected by the legal question.

The court was informed that the legislation had been amended, which potentially rendered the applicant's argument moot for future cases. However, the applicant sought to address this by presenting the *Croker v Haines* decision, which indicated a substantial number of pending jury cases in the Supreme Court. These cases, while not exclusively involving employer's liability insurance, were understood to largely comprise industrial accident claims. The court acknowledged the relevance of this information in assessing the application.