WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION
APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BY AN ARBITRATOR
CITATION:Orr v Direct Couriers (Australia) Pty Ltd [2004] NSW WCC PD 28
APPELLANT: William Douglas Orr
RESPONDENT: Direct Couriers (Australia) Pty Ltd
INSURER:NRMA Workers Compensation (NSW) (No.2) Pty Ltd
FILE NUMBER: WCC 12768-2003 (WCC 5261-2002)
DATE OF ARBITRATOR’S DECISION: 14 November 2003
DATE OF APPEAL DECISION: 20 May 2004
SUBJECT MATTER OF DECISION: Jurisdiction to appeal a decision of the Registrar; whether costs can be claimed for multiple events exceeding the maximum in Clause 119 and Schedule 6 of the Workers Compensation Regulation 2003.
PRESIDENTIAL MEMBER: Dr Gabriel Fleming
HEARING:On the papers
REPRESENTATION: Appellant: Steve Masselos & Co. Solicitors
Respondent: Bartier Perry Solicitors
ORDERS MADE ON APPEAL: The decision of the Registrar is confirmed.
No order is made as to costs.
BACKGROUND
On 2 December 2003 William Douglas Orr (‘the Appellant/the Worker’) filed an appeal against a decision of the Registrar (by her delegate) of the Workers Compensation Commission dated 14 November 2003.
The Respondent to the Appeal is Direct Couriers (Australia) Pty Ltd (‘the Respondent’) and the relevant insurer is NRMA Workers Compensation (NSW) (No.2) Pty Ltd (‘the Insurer’).
The appeal relates to an ‘Application to Resolve Dispute’ lodged by the Worker and resolved by a Commission Arbitrator on 9 April 2003. The Certificate of Determination issued on that date, details orders, made by the consent of the parties, as to payment of weekly compensation to the Worker. The parties then reached an agreement as to compensation for whole person impairment and pain and suffering, and registered a Section 66A Lump Sum Agreement on 20 May 2003. The parties could not reach an agreement as to costs and requested that the matter be referred to the Registrar for a costs assessment.
The Registrar delegated the assessment of costs to an Arbitrator pursuant to section 371(2) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (‘the 1998 Act’). The Certificate of Determination of Applicant’s Costs, dated 14 November 2003, records the Registrar’s orders as follows:
The costs are assessed as follows:
1.The Applicant’s costs are assessed at $6,418.50 (inclusive of GST)
2.The Applicant’s costs of the Assessment are assessed at nil
No order as to costs of the assessment.
Determination
The total costs payable by the Respondent to the Applicant are therefore determined in the amount of $6,418.50 (inclusive of GST).
The Appellant seeks to have the decision of the Registrar revoked and a new decision made in its place awarding him $8,143.75 in costs under the Compensation Costs Table. The total amount in dispute in this appeal is $1,725.25.
The Respondent argues that the decision should be confirmed and the Appellant pay the costs of the appeal.
The appeal was referred to me on 21 April 2004.
ISSUES IN DISPUTE
There are essentially two errors of law submitted by the Appellant in the appeal. They may be summarised as follows:
1. The Registrar, by her delegate, erred in the interpretation…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Orr v Direct Couriers (Australia) Pty Ltd 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2004] NSWWCCPD 28
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Commission considered the arguments presented by both parties and examined the relevant statutory provisions. It was noted that Clause 119 of the Regulation allows for an appeal against the Registrar's decision on a matter of law to the Commission constituted by a Presidential member. However, neither the Workers Compensation Commission Rules 2003 nor sections 351 and 352 of the 1998 Act confer jurisdiction upon a Presidential Member to determine such matters. The Commission found that the appeal process outlined in Clause 119 was not applicable because the determination was made by the Commission constituted by the Registrar, not by an Arbitrator. Furthermore, the Registrar's determination under Clause 118 of the Regulation was binding, and no appeal or review was permissible except as provided by the Division.
Based on the reasoning above, the Commission concluded that the appeal from the Registrar's decision on costs could not be heard by a Commission constituted by a Presidential member. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the Registrar's determination regarding the costs was upheld. The Commission emphasised that the statutory framework did not support the jurisdiction of a Presidential Member to hear such appeals, and the appeal process outlined in Clause 119 did not apply in this context.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.