Michael Adderley v SAS Trustee Corporation

In the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, Michael Adderley brought an action against the SAS Trustee Corporation, contesting a decision that he had not provided the required "notice" of his injuries, as mandated by section 10(B)(2)(a) of the Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906 (NSW). Adderley alleged that he injured his left knee during his training at the NSW police academy in 1987, but claimed that the clinical record inaccurately referred to his right knee instead of his left knee. He argued that this discrepancy did not prevent the record from being in the effect of the prescribed form and, therefore, constituted valid notice under the statute.

The court was required to determine whether the clinical record that Adderley claimed constituted notice was in or to the effect of the prescribed form, and whether the reference to his right knee was an error. The central issue was whether the clinical record, despite its inaccuracy, satisfied the statutory requirements for valid notice. The court had to assess whether the discrepancy between the injured knee and the one recorded in the clinical note was a material error that invalidated the notice.

The court held that the clinical record did not meet the statutory requirements for valid notice. The court found that the reference to the right knee instead of the left knee was a material error, which meant that the notice was not in the prescribed form. Furthermore, the court concluded that Adderley had not established that the reference to his right knee in the clinical note was inaccurate. Therefore, the court dismissed Adderley's claim, finding that he had not satisfied the statutory requirements for notice.

The court ordered that the application be dismissed, and that the defendant, the SAS Trustee Corporation, was to recover its costs of the application from the plaintiff.