Martin v Australian Postal Corporation

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Martin v Australian Postal Corporation [2000] FCA 1646

WORKERS COMPENSATION – Commonwealth legislation – Claimed incapacity for work – Challenge to decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Tribunal found that claimant was fit for full-time work subject to certain specified restrictions – No finding as to whether such work was available to him – Whether Tribunal erred in law in omitting to make that finding – Steps to be taken by Tribunal where the available evidence was inadequate.

Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988, ss 14 and 19

JOHN MARTIN v AUSTRALIAN POSTAL CORPORATION

N856 of 2000

WILCOX J
SYDNEY
17 NOVEMBER 2000

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N856 of 2000

BETWEEN:	JOHN MARTIN Applicant
AND:	AUSTRALIAN POSTAL CORPORATION Respondent
JUDGE:	WILCOX J
DATE OF ORDER:	17 NOVEMBER 2000
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.That part of the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal dated 13 July 2000, as is contained in the second paragraph thereof, commencing with the words “In substitution therefore” and ending with the words “amount of compensation” be set aside.

2.The matter be remitted to the Tribunal for further hearing, with such further evidence as may be provided or required, and determination according to law.

3.The respondent, Australian Postal Corporation, pay the costs of the applicant, John Martin.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N856 of 2000

BETWEEN:	JOHN MARTIN Applicant
AND:	AUSTRALIAN POSTAL CORPORATION Respondent

JUDGE:	WILCOX J
DATE:	17 NOVEMBER 2000
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. WILCOX J: This is an appeal, under s44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act1975, against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) in relation to a claim for compensation under s14 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988.

   The facts

2. The applicant, John Martin, was employed by the respondent, Australian Postal Corporation (“Australia Post”) as a mail delivery officer.  He suffered two separate accidents, in 1990 and 1991 respectively, while riding a motorcycle in the course of his employment.  On both occasions he suffered injuries to his right shoulder. 

3. Mr Martin resigned from his employment with Australia Post on 12 November 1992; this being for reasons unconnected with the injuries sustained by him in the accidents. 

4. Mr Martin then took a position with Panasonic as a driver.  He left that job on 25 June 1993, once again for reasons unconnected with his accidents while delivering mail.

5. Late in 1993 Mr Martin suffered pain in his right shoulder.  This was diagnosed as arthritic pain stemming from damage to the shoulder sustained in the two motorcycle accidents.

6. In the period since late 1993, Mr Martin has worked only intermittently.  His longest employment was with the Illawarra Health Service in 1997-98.  Mr Martin could do the work, which involved patient care, but he lost his job when there was no more work…