Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd v Hills

Case [2015] NSWCA 222

Court of Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd v Hills [2015] NSWCA 222
Hearing dates:22 June 2015
Decision date: 04 August 2015
Before: McColl JA at [1]; Basten JA at [2]; Simpson JA at [42]
Decision:

(1)   Allow the appeal and set aside the orders made by the Deputy President on 10 July 2014.

 

(2)   In their place:

 

(a)   dismiss the appeal from the decision of the senior arbitrator of 13 January 2011;

 

(b)   order that the appellant worker pay the costs of the respondent employer of that appeal;

 

(3)   Order that the respondent pay the appellant’s costs in this Court.

(4) Grant the respondent a certificate under the Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 (NSW).
Catchwords:

WORKERS COMPENSATION - respondent injured at party held on work premises - whether injury arose out of employment - whether injury arose in course of employment - respondent awarded compensation in Workers Compensation Commission by presidential member - injury found to have arisen in course of employment - injury found to have arisen out of employment - appeal from decision of presidential member - appeal limited to appeal in point of law - Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW), s 353(1)

 

APPEAL - whether Workers Compensation Commission erred in point of law in finding injury arose in course of employment - Hatzimanolis v ANI Corporation Ltd [1992] HCA 21; 173 CLR 473 - Comcare v PVYW [2013] HCA 41; 250 CLR 246 - whether Workers Compensation Commission erred in point of law in finding injury arose out of employment

APPEAL - whether Workers Compensation Commission erred in determining terms and conditions of employment by reference to respondent’s subjective perception - employer defines the terms of employment, Henderson v Commissioner of Railways (WA) (1937) 58 CLR 281 - Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd v Hills [2012] NSWCA 324 - appeal allowed
Legislation Cited: Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), ss 4, 9, 9A
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW), ss 288, 352, 353
Cases Cited: Badawi v Nexon Asia Pacific Pty Ltd t/as Commander Australia Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 324; 75 NSWLR 503
Comcare v PVYW [2013] HCA 41; 250 CLR 246
Commonwealth v Oliver [1962] HCA 38; 107 CLR 353
Danvers v Commissioner for Railways [1969] HCA 64; 122 CLR 529
Dhanhoa v The Queen [2003] HCA 40; 217 CLR 1
Hatzimanolis v ANI Corporation Ltd [1992] HCA 21; 173 CLR 473
Hills v Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd [2011] NSWWCCPD 30
Hills v Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd (No 2) [2014] NSWWCCPD 42
Hills v Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd [2014] HCASL 75
Mercer v ANZ Banking Group Ltd [2000] NSWCA 138; 48 NSWLR 740
Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd v Hills [2012] NSWCA 324
Roncevich v Repatriation Commission [2005] HCA 40; 222 CLR 115
Zickar v MGH Plastic Industries Pty Ltd (1996) 187 CLR 310
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd (Appellant)
Kathryn…

Continue reading Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd v Hills

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd v Hills [2015] NSWCA 222
Case
[2015] NSWCA 222
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against a decision of a presidential member of the Workers Compensation Commission. The dispute concerned a claim for workers' compensation by the respondent, who sustained an injury at a party held on work premises. The presidential member had found that the injury arose both out of and in the course of the respondent's employment.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the Workers Compensation Commission erred in point of law in finding that the respondent's injury arose in the course of employment, and whether it erred in finding that the injury arose out of employment. The appeal was limited to questions of law, pursuant to section 353(1) of the *Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998* (NSW). The court also considered whether the Commission erred in determining the terms and conditions of employment by reference to the respondent's subjective perception.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, setting aside the decision of the Deputy President. The Court reasoned that the presidential member had erred in law by determining the terms and conditions of employment by reference to the worker's subjective perception, rather than by reference to the objective terms defined by the employer, citing *Henderson v Commissioner of Railways (WA)* and *Pioneer Studios Pty Ltd v Hills* [2012] NSWCA 324. The Court found that the injury did not arise out of or in the course of employment.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal ordered that the appeal from the decision of the senior arbitrator be dismissed, and that the respondent worker pay the costs of the appellant employer of that appeal. The respondent was also ordered to pay the appellant's costs in the Court of Appeal and was granted a certificate under the *Suitors’ Fund Act 1951* (NSW).

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Allow the appeal and set aside the orders made by the Deputy President on 10 July 2014.

(2) In their place:

(a) dismiss the appeal from the decision of the senior arbitrator of 13 January 2011;

(b) order that the appellant worker pay the costs of the respondent employer of that appeal;

(3) Order that the respondent pay the appellant’s costs in this Court.

(4) Grant the respondent a certificate under the Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 (NSW).

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.