Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Preston v Randwick City Council & Ors [2012] NSWCA 178 Hearing dates: 7 June 2012 Decision date: 18 June 2012 Before: Allsop P
Sackville AJADecision: 1. Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
Catchwords: INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION - Application for leave to appeal - Workers Compensation Commission dismissed appeal against consent orders made in proceedings before Commission constituted by an Arbitrator - Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998, s 354(7A) - whether the Commission constituted by a Presidential member erred in law - whether applicant was denied procedural fairness - no denial of procedural fairness - leave to appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW) - s 294, s 350(3), s 350(6), s 352(5), s 353(1), s 353(7), s 354(6), 354 (7A), s 375
Workers Compensation Commission Rules 2011 - r 15.3, r 15.9Cases Cited: Hall v Nominal Defendant [1966] HCA 36; 117 CLR 423
Markulin v Healthwoods Pty Ltd [2007] NSWWCCPD 76; DDCR 527
Sapina v Coles Myer Ltd [2001] NSWCA 71
Sorcevski v Steggles Pty Ltd (1991) 7 NSWCCR 315
Spears v Department of Ageing, Disability & Homecare of NSW [2010] NSWWCCPD 35
Wickstead v Browne (1992) 30 NSWLR 1Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Stephen Frederick Preston (Applicant)
Randwick City Council (First Respondent)
Allianz Australia Workers' Compensation (NSW) Ltd (Second Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Stephen Frederick Preston (in person) (Applicant)
Larry King SC (First and Second Respondents)
Solicitors:
Unrepresented (Applicant)
Ellison Tillyard Callanan (First and Second Respondents)
File Number(s): 2012/43089 Decision under appeal
- Citation:
- Preston v Randwick City Council [2012] NSWWCCPD 1
- Date of Decision:
- 2012-01-10 00:00:00
- Before:
- Deputy President Kevin O'Grady
- File Number(s):
- A1 - 1686/11
Judgment
THE COURT: This is an application for leave to appeal from a decision of the Workers Compensation Commission ("Commission") constituted by a Presidential member (O'Grady DP). The Commission dismissed an appeal brought by the applicant against consent orders made by an Arbitrator on 22 August 2011. The orders were made by the Arbitrator in conformity with Heads of Agreement that had been signed by the applicant, his counsel and the representative of the respondent ("the Council").
The Commission made the order dismissing the appeal from the Arbitrator's decision under s 354(7A) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 ("WIM Act"). This provision empowers the Commission to dismiss proceedings before it:
"before or during the conduct of the proceedings:
...
(b) if it is satisfied that the proceedings are frivolous or otherwise misconceived…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Preston v Randwick City Council 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
- [2012] NSWCA 178
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the Supreme Court were whether the Commission, constituted by a Presidential member, had erred in law in dismissing the applicant's appeal, and whether the applicant had been denied procedural fairness during the proceedings before the Commission.
The Court found that there was no denial of procedural fairness to the applicant. Consequently, the Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal. The application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
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.