Legal Research
Cases
Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic

Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic

Case [2008] WASCA 60 14 March 2008

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL CO -v- JAKOVLJEVIC [2008] WASCA 60

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2008] WASCA 60
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:	CACV:87/2007	Heard:	5 FEBRUARY 2008
Coram:	WHEELER JA PULLIN JA BUSS JA	Delivered:	13/03/08
No of pages:	12	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Leave to appeal granted Appeal dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL CO RATKO JAKOVLJEVIC
Catchwords:	Appeal Workers' compensation "Review" Scope
Legislation:	Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA), s 246, s 247
Case References:	Boston Clothing Co Pty Ltd v Margaronis (1992) 27 NSWLR 580 Builders Licensing Board v Sperway Constructions (Syd) Pty Ltd [1976] HCA 62; (1976) 135 CLR 616 Fitzgerald v Smorgon Steel Pty Ltd [2004] WASCA 185 Ruhamah Property Co Ltd v The Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1928] HCA 22; (1928) 41 CLR 148 Sotico Pty Ltd v Wilson [2007] WASCA 112 Temwood Holdings Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2001] WASCA 199; (2001) 115 LGERA 152 XCO Pty Ltd v The Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia [1971] HCA 37; (1971) 124 CLR 343

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL CO -v- JAKOVLJEVIC [2008] WASCA 60 CORAM : WHEELER JA

PULLIN JA

BUSS JA

HEARD : 5 FEBRUARY 2008 DELIVERED : 14 MARCH 2008 FILE NO/S : CACV 87 of 2007 BETWEEN : PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL CO

Appellant

AND

RATKO JAKOVLJEVIC

Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : DISPUTE RESOLUTION DIRECTORATE, WORKCOVER WA

Coram : COMMISSIONER NISBET

File No : C 19 of 2007

Catchwords:

Appeal - Workers' compensation - "Review" - Scope

(Page 2)

Legislation:

Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA), s 246, s 247

Result:

Leave to appeal granted

Appeal dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : Mr M H Zilko SC & Mr D W Williams

Respondent : Mr A J Castley

Solicitors:

Appellant : Williams Handcock

Respondent : Bradford & Co

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Boston Clothing Co Pty Ltd v Margaronis (1992) 27 NSWLR 580
Builders Licensing Board v Sperway Constructions (Syd) Pty Ltd [1976] HCA 62; (1976) 135 CLR 616
Fitzgerald v Smorgon Steel Pty Ltd [2004] WASCA 185
Ruhamah Property Co Ltd v The Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1928] HCA 22; (1928) 41 CLR 148
Sotico Pty Ltd v Wilson [2007] WASCA 112
Temwood Holdings Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2001] WASCA 199; (2001) 115 LGERA 152
XCO Pty Ltd v The Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia [1971] HCA 37; (1971) 124 CLR 343

(Page 3)

WHEELER JA

The application

1 This is an application for leave to appeal against a decision of a commissioner pursuant to the Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA) (the Act). On 27 June 2007, Pullin JA ordered that the application for leave be heard together with the appeal.

2 There were originally three grounds of…

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.

Continue reading Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic

Details

AGLC: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60
Case: [2008] WASCA 60
Decision Date: 14 MARCH 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic involves an appeal against a workers' compensation decision made by the Workers' Compensation Commission. The dispute centres around the interpretation and scope of the review process within the workers' compensation framework. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The legal issues before the court were whether the scope of review by the court was limited to the consideration of errors of law and whether it could extend to include errors of fact. The applicant argued that the Workers' Compensation Commission had made an error in fact and, as such, the court should have the authority to review and rectify that error. The respondent contended that the court's role was confined to reviewing errors of law and not errors of fact.

The court found that the scope of review by the court was indeed limited to errors of law. The court held that the commission's role was to determine factual disputes, and any errors in this regard were not subject to judicial review. The court emphasised the importance of the separation of powers and the principle that the commission, as a specialist body, was better equipped to make findings of fact. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as the court found no grounds to interfere with the commission's decision on the basis of an error of fact.

The final orders of the court were to grant leave to appeal but ultimately dismiss the appeal, affirming the commission's decision.

Orders

Orders of the court

Leave to appeal granted

Appeal dismissed

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

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Actions

Citations

Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60

Most Recent Citation

Catholic Education Office of WA v Granitto [2012] WASCA 266

Cases Citing This Decision

Chowdhury v ISS Security Pty Ltd [2025] WADC 65
Citation 1 (Para 4)

…ing the decision unreversed.[32] [32] Engine Protection Equipment Pty Ltd v Miller [2018] WASCA 55 [46]; See also Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [19] ‑ [20].…
Armet v CFC Consolidated Pty Ltd [2025] WADC 50
Citation 2 (Para 1)

…ould involve a question of law, within the meaning of the 1981 Act. In relation to this issue, Wheeler JA said in Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60: … 18The legislative use of the term 'involved' indicates that the commissioner's role is not confined to the determination of pure questions of law.…
Green v Mineral Resources [2025] WADC 33
Citation 3 (Para 2)

…is is a factor which the court may consider relevant to the question of whether leave should be granted.[17] [17] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [17], [25].…
Lourey v WA Country Health Service [2025] WADC 19
Citation 4 (Para 6)

…this is a factor which the court may consider relevant to the question of whether leave should be granted.[1] [1] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [17], [25].…
Moon Recruitment Pty Ltd v Execom Software Pty Ltd t/as Execom Personnel [2025] WADC 18
Citation 5 (Para 5)

…pellant must provide a proper basis, by way of establishing error, for disturbing the decision of the arbitrator: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [26] - [27] (Wheeler JA) ( Pacific Industrial ). That is in addition to the requirement that, in order to obtain leave to appeal, the appeal must inv…
Oz Shut Pty Ltd v Hilton [2025] WADC 10
Citation 6 (Para 2)

…Yet, it is for the appellant to provide a proper basis for disturbing the decision by pointing to error: Pacific Industrial Pty Co Ltd v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [24], [26].…
Qube Ports Pty Ltd v Bennison [2024] WADC 82
Citation 7 (Para 2)

…on, there is no jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal.[17] [16] See s 247(2)(b) 1981 Act; s 391(2) 2023 Act. [17] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [17] ( Pacific Industrial ).…
DK Hospitality 2 Pty Ltd v Escott [2024] WADC 67
Citation 8 (Para 7)

…eview is ordinarily conducted on the materials before the arbitrator: s 247(6). It is not a hearing de novo. [67] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [19] - [20].…
Francis v Publications & Exhibitions Pty Ltd [2023] WADC 129
Citation 9 (Para 2)

…; Atanasoska v Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd [2009] WASCA 17. [82] Catholic Education Office of WA v Granitto [54]; Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [17].…
Oliver v Doral Mineral Sands Pty Ltd [2023] WADC 118
Citation 10 (Para 2)

…on of law, the whole decision of the arbitrator, and not merely the identified question of law is open to review: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20]. 29If the court decides that a question of law is involved and leave to appeal has been granted, then the District Court is required to undertak…
Bannewari v North Metropolitan Health Service (Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital) [2023] WADC 104
Citation 11 (Para 2)

…; Atanasoska v Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd [2009] WASCA 17. [57] Catholic Education Office of WA v Granitto [54]; Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [17].…
Gosper v Pilbara Iron Company (Services) Pty Ltd [2023] WADC 102
Citation 12 (Para 5)

…de in the first instance'. Once a question of law is involved the whole decision appealed from is open to review: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 at [18].…
Neville v Choice One Pty Ltd [2023] WADC 79
Citation 13 (Para 2)

…eal review.[1] A decision does not involve a question of law unless the error is material to the decision.[2] [1] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20]. [2] Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321.…
Douthwaite v MEDISERVE Pty Ltd [2023] WADC 56
Citation 14 (Para 4)

…de in the first instance'. Once a question of law is involved the whole decision appealed from is open to review: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18].…
WorkPac Pty Ltd v Shields [2023] WADC 29
Citation 15 (Para 4)

…court cannot simply ignore the arbitrator's decision and substitute its own decision for that of the arbitrator: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18] ( Pacific Industrial ).…
Long v Dragon Medics Pty Ltd T/A Cockburn Medical Centre [2022] WADC 124
Citation 16 (Para 5)

…preferable. Some material error of fact or law, or some other miscarriage of justice, must be established.[5] [5] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60; Marks .…
Wang v Costa Holdings Pty Ltd [2022] WADC 119
Citation 17 (Para 2)

…to prove some proper basis for disturbing the decision of the arbitrator, that is an error of fact, law or logic: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovlievic [2008] WASCA 60; Smith v WA Plantation Resources Pty Ltd [2018] WADC 158.…
Buckeridge Nominees Pty Ltd v Foxley [2022] WADC 118
Citation 18 (Para 6)

…t must establish some error, either of fact, law or logic before the court may disturb the arbitrator's findings: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20] - [21], [26].…
Dhu v Royal Perth Hospital [2022] WADC 89
Citation 19 (Para 2)

…s before the arbitrator.[64] No application to adduce additional evidence was made by a party to the appeal. [64] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60; Marks v Coles Supermarkets [2021] WASCA 176 [103].…
RLA Morgans v Vrebac [2022] WADC 86
Citation 20 (Para 7)

…ogic, and persuade the court that the arbitrator's decision should be varied, discharged, or otherwise disturbed: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60.…
River Hill Contracting Pty Ltd v Moore [2022] WADC 60
Citation 21 (Para 1)

…l is conducted on the materials, which were before the arbitrator: s 247(6). The appeal is not a hearing de novo: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20] ( Pacific Industrial ). If the court is satisfied that the appeal involves a question of law, then the court must conduct a real review of the a…
Yang v The St Brigids Convent of Mercy Perth Ltd [2021] WADC 132
Citation 22 (Para 5)

…Frequently, in workers' compensation appeals, matters of law and matters of fact are intertwined. In Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60, Wheeler JA said, in relation to the materially similar provisions as they then appeared in the WCIMA: 18The legislative use of the term 'involved' indicates that…
Marks v Coles Supermarkets [2021] WASCA 176
Citation 23 (Para 4)

…court sat a bench of five judges to consider the appellant's argument it should overrule Pacific Industrial . [1] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60.…
Cullen v Woodside Energy Ltd [2021] WADC 56
Citation 24 (Para 1)

…eview: XCO Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1971] HCA 37 [10]; [1971] HCA 37; (1971) 124 CLR 343, 349; Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18]. 26If a question of law is involved and leave to appeal has been granted, the District Court must undertake a 'real review' of the application,…
Greenaway v Prestige Helicopters Pty Ltd [2020] WADC 159
Citation 25 (Para 15)

…1] [19] Section 247(5). Unless leave is granted for the admission of fresh or additional evidence: s 247(6). [20] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20] - [25] (Wheeler JA). See also Cape Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Burridge [2019] WADC 105 [24] (Gething DCJ): '[I]f some question of law is "invo…
Dodson v Woolworths Group Ltd [2020] WADC 157
Citation 26 (Para 4)

…The Court of Appeal in Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 considered the question of whether a matter of mixed law and fact would 'involve' a question of law under the WCIMA and how the workers' compensation commissioner (being the judicial officer who at that time conducted reviews of the arbitra…
Mitchell v St John of God Health Care Inc [2020] WADC 151
Citation 27 (Para 7)

…law has been identified, the District Court must then conduct a real review of the arbitrator's decision.[6] [6] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20] - [25] (Wheeler JA); Catholic Education Office of WA v Granitto [56] - [57] (Murphy JA).…
Armet v CFC Consolidated Pty Ltd [2020] WADC 142
Citation 28

…ustralia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles (2001) 52 NSWLR 705 Napier v BHP Billiton (Worsley Alumina) Pty Ltd [2015] WASCA 230 Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 Pollock v Wellington (1996) 15 WAR 1 Pownall v Conlan Management Pty Ltd (1995) 12 WAR 370 Rajski v Scitec Corp Pty Ltd (Unreported, NSWCA, No 146 of…
Beasley v Fortescue Metals Group Ltd [2020] WADC 118
Citation 29 (Para 9)

…or's decision should be varied, discharged or otherwise disturbed, it should stand.[17] [16] WCIMA s 247(5). [17] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20] - [26] (Wheeler JA, with whom Buss & Pullin JJA agreed).…
Tupaea v Coles Liquor [2020] WADC 83
Citation 30 (Para 5)

…al involves a question of law where either an error of law, or an error of mixed law and fact is involved.[4] [4] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18] (Wheeler JA).…
CFC Consolidated Pty Ltd v Armet [2020] WADC 85
Citation 31 (Para 9)

…re questions of law.[22] [22] Robinson Helicopter Company Inc v McDermott [2016] HCA 22; (2016) 331 ALR 550 [43]; Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18].…
Uprety v Serco Australia Pty Ltd [2020] WADC 53
Citation 32 (Para 8)

…ld remain unaltered.[41] [39] Robinson Helicopter Company Inc v McDermott [2016] HCA 22; (2016) 331 ALR 550 [43]; Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18]. [40] Erceg v Galati Nominees Pty Ltd [33]; Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [26]. [41] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [20] ‑ [26].…
Marks v Coles Supermarkets [2020] WADC 36
Citation 33 (Para 12)

…or's decision should be varied, discharged or otherwise disturbed, it should stand.[59] [58] WCIMA s 247(5). [59] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20] - [26] (Wheeler JA, with whom Buss & Pullin JJA agreed).…
The Cerebral Palsy Association of Western Australia Ltd t/as Ability Centre v Papalia [2019] WADC 180
Citation 34 (Para 1)

…2] WASCA 266 [56]. [8] Catholic Education Office of WA v Granitto [57]. [9] Catholic Education Office of WA [57]; Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20], [26].…
Fox v Roy Hill Holdings Pty Ltd [2019] WADC 171
Citation 35 (Para 5)

…varied, discharged or otherwise disturbed, it should stand.[24] [15] WCIMA s 247(5). [16] WCIMA s 247(6). [17] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18]. [18] Erceg [33]; Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [20], [26]. [19] Pacific Industrial Co [25]. [20] Pacific Industrial Co [18]. [21] Robinson…
De Aguiar v Villa Dalmacia Aged Care Association Inc [2019] WADC 130
Citation 36 (Para 6)

…d, the District Court must then, by reason of WCIMA s 247(5), conduct a real review of the arbitrator's decision: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20] – [25] (Wheeler JA); Catholic Education Office of WA v Granitto [2012] WASCA 266 [56] - [57] (Murphy JA).…
Cape Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Burridge [2019] WADC 105
Citation 37 (Para 12)

…turbed, it should stand.[36] [26] WCIMA s 247(5). [27] Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 (WA) s 56(1). [28] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18] (Wheeler JA, with whom Pullin & Buss JJA agreed). [29] Erceg [33]; Pacific Industrial Co [20], [26]. [30] Pacific Industrial Co [25]. [31] Pacif…
Jones v Ramsay Health Care Pty Ltd [2019] WADC 97
Citation 38 (Para 10)

…urbed, it should stand. [34] [24] WCIMA s 247(5). [25] Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 (WA) s 56(1). [26] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18] (Wheeler JA, with whom Pullin & Buss JJA agreed). [27] Erceg [33]; Pacific Industrial Co [20], [26]. [28] Pacific Industrial Co [25]. [29] Pacif…
D'Orsogna Limited v Zhang [2019] WADC 73
Citation 39 (Para 9)

…d unless the appeal judge, on review, is persuaded that the order being reviewed should be altered or discharged: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20] ‑ [22], [24], [26] (Wheeler JA, with Pullin JA & Buss JA agreeing); Catholic Education Office (WA) v Granitto [56] ‑ [57], [65].…
Woodside Energy Ltd v Kieronski [2019] WADC 64
Citation 40 (Para 2)

…trict Court must then, by reason of s 247(5) of the WCIM Act, conduct a real review of the arbitrator's decision: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20] – [25] (Wheeler JA); Catholic Education Office of WA v Granitto [2012] WASCA 266 [56] - [57] (Murphy JA).…
Buxton v Ausdrill Ltd [2019] WADC 25
Citation 41 (Para 3)

…the 'review' persuades the judge that the order being reviewed should be altered or discharged, it should stand: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20].…
West v BGC Australia Pty Ltd [2019] WADC 20
Citation 42 (Para 2)

…of law, the whole decision of the arbitrator, and not merely the identified question of law is open to review: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20]. If the court decides that a question of law is involved and leave to appeal has been granted, then the District Court is required to undertake a…
Smith v WA Plantation Resources Pty Ltd [2018] WADC 158
Citation 43 (Para 4)

…rt substitute its own decision for that of the arbitrator: Erceg v Galati Nominees Pty Ltd [2016] WASCA 112 [33]; Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [26].…
Magbula v Life Without Barriers [2018] WADC 151
Citation 44 (Para 5)

…ion of law, the whole decision of the Arbitrator and not merely the identified question of law is open to review: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18].…
Waite v Alcoa of Australia Ltd [2018] WADC 147
Citation 45 (Para 9)

…d inexpensive (s 3(d) of the Act). The primary fact-finder in the event of a dispute is, clearly, the arbitrator: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [17] (Wheeler JA).…
Rodgers v Amcor Ltd [2018] WADC 134
Citation 46 (Para 11)

…ny Incorporated v McDermott [2016] HCA 22; (2016) 331 ALR 550 [43] (French CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle & Gaudron JJ); Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18] (Wheeler JA, with whom Pullin & Buss JJA agreed). [25] Pacific Industrial Co [18]. [26] Robinson Helicopter [43]; Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22; (20…
Hall v Telstra SNP Monitoring Pty Ltd [2018] WADC 92
Citation 47 (Para 9)

…ny Incorporated v McDermott [2016] HCA 22; (2016) 331 ALR 550 [43] (French CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle & Gaudron JJ); Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18] (Wheeler JA, with who Pullin & Buss JJA agreed). [50] Pacific Industrial Co [18]. [51] Robinson Helicopter [43]; Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22; (200…
Anderson v Mercy Hospital Mount Lawley [2018] WADC 74
Citation 48 (Para 4)

…In Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 the Court of Appeal considered the question of whether a question of mixed law and fact would 'involve' a question of law under the Act. Wheeler JA said: 17As has been noted on many occasions, the purposes of the Act include the resolution of disputes in a way…
BHP Billiton Iron Ore Pty Ltd v Treby [2018] WASCA 60
Citation 49 (Para 2)

…confined to the determination of pure questions of law, but extends to questions of mixed fact and law.[32] [32] Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [18].…
MacMahon Holdings Ltd v McKenzie [2018] WADC 28
Citation 50

…on of law, the whole decision of the arbitrator, and not merely the identified question of law is open to review: Pacific Industrial Co v Jakovljevic [2008] WASCA 60 [20].…

See all citing cases →

Cases Cited

Sotico Pty Ltd v Wilson [2007] WASCA 112
Citation 1

…teel Pty Ltd [2004] WASCA 185 Ruhamah Property Co Ltd v The Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1928] HCA 22; (1928) 41 CLR 148 Sotico Pty Ltd v Wilson [2007] WASCA 112 Temwood Holdings Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2001] WASCA 199; (2001) 115 LGERA 152 XCO Pty Ltd v The Commissioner of Taxation o…
Fitzgerald v Smorgon Steel Pty Ltd [2004] WASCA 185
Citation 2

…992) 27 NSWLR 580 Builders Licensing Board v Sperway Constructions (Syd) Pty Ltd [1976] HCA 62; (1976) 135 CLR 616 Fitzgerald v Smorgon Steel Pty Ltd [2004] WASCA 185 Ruhamah Property Co Ltd v The Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1928] HCA 22; (1928) 41 CLR 148 Sotico Pty Ltd v Wilson [2007] WASCA 112 Temwood Hold…
Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22
Citation 3 (Para 25)

…the Commissioner is obliged 'within the constraints marked out by the nature of the appellate process … to conduct a real review …': Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118 at [25].…
Temwood Holdings Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2001] WASCA 199
Citation 4

…Taxation [1928] HCA 22; (1928) 41 CLR 148 Sotico Pty Ltd v Wilson [2007] WASCA 112 Temwood Holdings Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2001] WASCA 199; (2001) 115 LGERA 152 XCO Pty Ltd v The Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia [1971] HCA 37; (1971) 124 CLR 343…
Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd v Australian industrial Relations Commission [2000] HCA 47
Citation 5

…Once a question of law is identified, leave is granted and an error of law is held to have occurred ( Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd v Australian Industrial Relations Commission (2000) 203 CLR 194 at [14]), then the Commissioner is obliged 'within the constraints marked out by the nature of the appellate process … to conduct a real review …': Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118 at [25…
Smith v New South Wales Bar Association [1992] HCA 36
Citation 6

…Boston Clothing Co Pty Ltd v Margaronis (1992) 27 NSWLR 580 Builders Licensing Board v Sperway Constructions (Syd) Pty Ltd [1976] HCA 62; (1976) 135 CLR 616 Fitzgerald v Smorgon Steel Pty Ltd [2004] WASCA 185 Ruhamah Property Co Ltd v The Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1928] HCA 22; (1928) 41 CLR 148 Sotico Pty Ltd…
XCO Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1971] HCA 37
Citation 7

…ern Australian Planning Commission [2001] WASCA 199; (2001) 115 LGERA 152 XCO Pty Ltd v The Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia [1971] HCA 37; (1971) 124 CLR 343…
Ruhamah Property Co Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1928] HCA 22
Citation 8

…[1976] HCA 62; (1976) 135 CLR 616 Fitzgerald v Smorgon Steel Pty Ltd [2004] WASCA 185 Ruhamah Property Co Ltd v The Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1928] HCA 22; (1928) 41 CLR 148 Sotico Pty Ltd v Wilson [2007] WASCA 112 Temwood Holdings Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2001] WASCA 199; (2001…
Builders Licensing Board v Sperway Constructions (Sydney) Pty Ltd [1976] HCA 62
Citation 9

…Boston Clothing Co Pty Ltd v Margaronis (1992) 27 NSWLR 580 Builders Licensing Board v Sperway Constructions (Syd) Pty Ltd [1976] HCA 62; (1976) 135 CLR 616 Fitzgerald v Smorgon Steel Pty Ltd [2004] WASCA 185 Ruhamah Property Co Ltd v The Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1928] HCA 22; (1928) 41 CLR 148 Sotico P…

Legislation Cited

Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (WA) 246
2 mentions
Compensation Court Act 1984 (NSW)
1 mention
Income Tax Assessment Act 1922 (Cth)
1 mention
Town Planning and Development Act 1928 (WA)
1 mention