Legal Research
Cases
Re Alexeef;

Re Alexeef;

Case [2002] WASC 291 4 December 2002

Standing

Jurisdiction

Admissibility of Evidence

Unjust Enrichment

Unconscionable Conduct

Workers' Compensation

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

RE ALEXEEF & ORS; EX PARTE PAUL [2002] WASC 291

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2002] WASC 291
Case No:	CIV:1263/2002	Heard:	4 OCTOBER 2002
Coram:	BARKER J	Delivered:	4/12/02
No of pages:	28	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Order nisi for certiorari made absolute as to part of determination only
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	RONNY PAUL BHP IRON ORE PTY LTD
Catchwords:	Workers' compensation Prerogative writ Return of order nisi for writ of certiorari Determination of a Medical Assessment Panel Adequacy of reasons of Medical Assessment Panel Whether effective determination of temporary psychiatric condition
Legislation:	Supreme Court Rules, O 56 Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981, s 25, s 84ZH, s 93D, s 145A,
Case References:	Accident Compensation Commission v Hawkins [1992] 1 VR 589 Brugnoni v Hydro Electric Commission (1957) 97 CLR 548 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321 Kinsella v Seton Catholic College, unreported; CM-112/00 1125; 22 February 2001 Re Anastas & Ors; Ex parte Welsby [2002] WASCA 82 Re Bannan & Ors; Ex parte Suleski [2001] WASCA 289 Re Monger; Ex parte Dutch [2001] WASCA 220 Craig v State of South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163 Dorran v Riordan (1990) 95 ALR 451

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CIVIL

CITATION : RE ALEXEEF & ORS; EX PARTE PAUL [2002] WASC 291 CORAM : BARKER J HEARD : 4 OCTOBER 2002 DELIVERED : 4 DECEMBER 2002 FILE NO/S : CIV 1263 of 2002 MATTER : Application for a Writ of Certiorari against MICHAEL ALEXEEF, BRIAN GALTONFENZI and MICHAEL HAGAN as members of a Medical Assessment Panel constituted under the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981 (As Amended) EX PARTE

RONNY PAUL

Applicant

BHP IRON ORE PTY LTD

Intervener

Catchwords:

Workers' compensation - Prerogative writ - Return of order nisi for writ of certiorari - Determination of a Medical Assessment Panel - Adequacy of reasons of Medical Assessment Panel - Whether effective determination of temporary psychiatric condition

Legislation:

Supreme Court Rules, O 56

(Page 2)

Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981, s 25, s 84ZH, s 93D, s 145A,

Result:

Order nisi for certiorari made absolute as to part of determination only

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant : Mr P G McGowan

Intervener : Mr E M Corboy

Solicitors:

Applicant : Paul O'Halloran & Associates

Intervener : Pynt McKay

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

Accident Compensation Commission v Hawkins [1992] 1 VR 589
Brugnoni v Hydro Electric Commission (1957) 97 CLR 548
Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321
Kinsella v Seton Catholic College, unreported; CM-112/00 1125; 22 February 2001
Re Anastas & Ors; Ex parte Welsby [2002] WASCA 82
Re Bannan & Ors; Ex parte Suleski [2001] WASCA 289
Re Monger; Ex parte Dutch [2001] WASCA 220

Case(s) also cited:

Craig v State of South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163
Dorran v Riordan (1990) 95 ALR 451

(Page 3)

1 BARKER J: An order nisi for writ of certiorari was granted in these…

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 Re Alexeef;

Details

AGLC: Re Alexeef; [2002] WASC 291
Case: [2002] WASC 291
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Western Australia, the applicant, Ronny Paul, sought to quash a decision of a medical assessment panel under the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981. The panel's determination found the applicant partially incapacitated for work due to his psychiatric condition, which was deemed temporary, and that he retained a capacity for work. The key issues were whether the panel's reasons were sufficient, if the panel erred in law by assuming the applicant would take increased medication or undergo cognitive behavioural therapy, and if the panel erred in concluding the applicant retained a capacity for work.

The court found the panel's reasons for determining the percentage of disability for the right shoulder and cervical spine were insufficient as they did not explain why specific percentages were chosen. The court held that the panel's reasons for finding the psychiatric condition temporary were adequate, as the panel's view that increased medication or therapy would improve the applicant's condition did not necessarily mean the condition would persist indefinitely. The court concluded the panel did not err in finding the applicant retained a capacity for work, as the finding was based on the applicant's current condition, not on assumptions about future treatment.

The order nisi for certiorari was made absolute as to the part of the determination pertaining to the right shoulder and cervical spine, but not as to the findings concerning the psychiatric condition. The panel was directed to remove its determination concerning the applicant for the purpose of quashing the invalid part.

Orders