Re Durham and TNT Australia Pty Ltd

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION

[2011] AATA 802

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No 2010/5105

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE  DIVISION		)
Re		Roger Durham

Applicant

And TNT Australia Pty Ltd

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Justice J Jagot, Presidential Member

Date15 November 2011

PlaceSydney

Decision The Administrative Appeals Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the application for review filed by the applicant on 24 November 2010. 

..............................................

Justice J Jagot
  Presidential Member

3.For reasons relating to the relevant statutory scheme, 1 July 2008 is a key date. On 1 July 2008 the respondent became a licensed corporation for the purposes of the Act. Pursuant to its licence, the respondent is not liable to pay compensation in accordance with the Act for any injury occurring at a time before the licence came into force.

4.Although (i)-(v) in the respondent’s statement of jurisdictional issues are presented as facts, they should be understood as the sub-questions on which the jurisdictional issue ultimately turns, in that each refers to a circumstance which must be present in order for the Tribunal’s review jurisdiction to be enlivened. 

5.It is also appropriate to note that, prior to this matter first coming before me (on 27 July 2011), the parties had filed and served submissions on a different “preliminary issue” said by the respondent to condition the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.  However, it was agreed by the parties at the hearing on 21 October 2011 that those submissions (and the questions on which they were based, including that identified in para 1 of the respondent’s statement of jurisdictional issues) have now been superseded and are relevant largely by way of background.

Statutory provisions

6.The Act provides for a scheme whereby employees may claim compensation for certain injuries, loss or damage arising in relation to their employment. In general, liability for payment of such compensation falls to Comcare as the “relevant authority” (s 4(1)). This liability is detailed in Part II and, by s 11, is defined as the liability to pay such amounts as are determined by the relevant authority to be payable under the Act. As such, Comcare is also generally responsible for determining whether compensation is payable when an employee makes a claim.

7.Part VIII of the Act enables the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission to grant licences to certain corporations authorising them to accept liability to pay compensation under the Act in respect of injuries, loss or damage suffered by their employees (ss 108 and 108A). If a licence is granted to a corporation, the corporation becomes the “relevant authority” in respect of its employees and takes on Comcare’s role of determining and managing claims, and of paying compensation to eligible employees (ss 4(10) and (10A), 98A).

8.Claims for compensation under the Act are governed by the provisions of Part V. Section 53(1)(a) of that Part provides that the Act does not apply to an injury in relation to an employee unless written notice of the injury is given to the relevant authority as soon as practicable.