MITCHELL and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application for reinstatement of a dismissed application before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The original application had been dismissed for failure to proceed within a reasonable time.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the dismissal of the application was made "in error" and, if so, whether the Tribunal should exercise its discretion to reinstate the application.

The Tribunal, applying the principles articulated by Carr J in *Goldie v MIMA*, adopted a broad interpretation of the word "error" in the context of section 42A(10) of the relevant Act. This interpretation encompassed any type of error, including administrative errors, mistakes of fact or law, or situations where the Tribunal was misled. The Tribunal found that this broad definition established a relatively low threshold for an applicant seeking reinstatement. The Tribunal considered the extensive procedural history of the application, noting that the concept of "error" could capture a multitude of factual circumstances, and that reinstatement was intended as a convenient, prompt, and inexpensive mechanism to rectify errors in the Tribunal's default jurisdiction.

The Tribunal ordered that the application be reinstated.