Moore-Mcquillan v Workcover Corporation

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the applicant, Moore-Mcquillan, against a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia, which had affirmed a determination by the respondent, WorkCover Corporation. The dispute concerned the applicant's entitlement to weekly payments of compensation under the *Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1986* (SA) following a work-related injury.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the applicant, who had been employed on a casual basis, was entitled to weekly payments of compensation calculated by reference to a notional weekly wage, notwithstanding that his actual earnings in the period immediately preceding his injury were significantly less than that notional wage. This involved an interpretation of the provisions of the Act relating to the calculation of weekly payments for injured workers.

The High Court, in allowing the appeal, reasoned that the *Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1986* (SA) provided for the calculation of weekly payments based on a worker's "average weekly earnings" or, in certain circumstances, a "notional weekly wage" if actual earnings were not representative. The Court held that the applicant's casual employment did not preclude him from being entitled to compensation calculated on a notional weekly wage, particularly where the Act contemplated such a calculation to ensure a fair and adequate level of compensation. The Court emphasised that the purpose of the statutory scheme was to provide compensation that reflected a worker's earning capacity, not merely their actual earnings in a limited preceding period.

The High Court ordered that the appeal be allowed and the matter remitted to the Supreme Court of South Australia for further consideration in accordance with the reasons of the High Court.