Legal Research
Cases
Nicol v Macquarie University

Nicol v Macquarie University

Link copied

Case Copied 27 April 2018 73 min read

Contents

On this page

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Nicol v Macquarie University [2018] NSWSC 530
Hearing dates: 5 October 2017
Date of orders: 27 April 2018
Decision date: 27 April 2018
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Administrative Law
Before: Harrison AsJ
Decision:
The Court declares that:

(1) The decision of the Appeal Panel in matter number 2738/17 made on 26 May 2017 is vitiated by jurisdictional error.

The Court makes an order:

(2) In the nature of certiorari removing into the Court the decision of the Appeal Panel in matter number made on 26 May 2017 and quashing that decision.

The Court further orders that:

(3) Matter number 2738/17 is remitted to the Workers Compensation Commission of New South Wales to be determined in accordance with law.
(4) The first defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs on an ordinary basis.
Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Judicial Review - Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW) - Review Panel Assessment – whether denial of procedural fairness - whether Review Panel failed to exercise jurisdiction – whether Appeal Panel misapplied the NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment in Respect of Apportionment
Legislation Cited: Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW)
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Bindah v Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 1290
Bindah v Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 264
Campbelltown City Council v Vegan & Ors [2004] NSWSC 1129
Campbelltown City Council v Vegan & Ors [2006] NSWCA 284; 67 NSWLR 372
Crean v Burrangong Pet Food Pty Limited [2007] NSWSC 839
Ferguson v State of New South Wales & Ors [2017] NSWSC 887
Frost v Kourouche [2014] NSWCA 39
Government Insurance Office of NSW v Aboushadi [1999] NSWCA 396
HG v The Queen [1999] HCA; 197 CLR 414; 160 ALR 554; 73 ALJR 281
Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd v Lakovska [2014] NSWCA 194
Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates (1994) 35 NSWLR 452; 10 NSWCCR 796
Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles [2001] NSWCA 305
Mercy Centre Lavington v Kiely [2017] NSWSC 1234
New South Wales Police Force v Registrar of the Workers Compensation Commission of New South Wales [2013] NSWSC 1792
Roger v De Gelder [2015] NSWCA 211
Schofield v Abigroup Limited [2016] NSWSC 954
Wingfoot Australia Partners Pty Ltd & Anor v Kocak [2013] HCA 43; 252 CLR 480; 303 ALR 64
Texts Cited: NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (Fourth Edition, 1 April 2016)
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Gregory William Nicol ( Plaintiff)
Macquarie University (First Defendant)
Workers Compensation Commission of NSW (Second Defendant)
The Medical Appeal Panel of the Workers compensation Commission of NSW constituted by Arbitrator John Wynyard and Approved Medical Specialists Robert Gertler and Brian Parsonage (Third Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
EG Romaniuk SC with EE Grotte (Plaintiff)
H Halligan (First Defendant)
Solicitors:
Walker Law Group (Plaintiff)
Hicksons Lawyers (First Defendant)
Submitting…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Nicol v Macquarie University and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2018] NSWSC 530
Decision Date: 27 April 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Nicol v Macquarie University was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The appellant, Nicol, sought judicial review of decisions made by a Review Panel and an Appeal Panel under the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW). The central issue in the case was whether the Review Panel had denied Nicol procedural fairness in its assessment of a workers compensation claim, whether the Review Panel had failed to exercise its jurisdiction, and whether the Appeal Panel had misapplied the NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment in Respect of Apportionment.

The court was required to determine whether the Review Panel had adhered to the principles of natural justice by providing Nicol with a fair opportunity to present his case. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the Review Panel had properly exercised its jurisdiction by making a decision on the merits of the claim. Furthermore, the court had to examine whether the Appeal Panel had correctly applied the guidelines in apportioning the permanent impairment, considering the context and specific circumstances of the case.

In delivering the judgment, the court found that the Review Panel had indeed denied Nicol procedural fairness by failing to provide him with adequate notice of the issues to be addressed and an opportunity to respond. The court also determined that the Review Panel had not properly exercised its jurisdiction, as it had made a decision without giving Nicol a fair opportunity to present his case. Furthermore, the Appeal Panel was found to have misapplied the guidelines in its apportionment of the permanent impairment. The court held that the Appeal Panel had not given appropriate weight to certain factors and had not followed the correct methodology as prescribed by the guidelines.

As a result of these findings, the court quashed the decisions of both the Review Panel and the Appeal Panel. The matter was remitted back to the Review Panel for reconsideration in accordance with the principles of natural justice, and for the Appeal Panel to re-evaluate the apportionment of the permanent impairment in accordance with the correct application of the guidelines.

Orders