RE MONGER; EX PARTE MORGAN [2003] WASC 146

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2003] WASC 146
Case No:	CIV:1188/2003	Heard:	18 JULY 2003
Coram:	ROBERTS-SMITH J	Delivered:	7/08/03
No of pages:	17	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Orders nisi for certiorari and mandamus discharged
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	DENNIS MORGAN
Catchwords:	Administrative law Workers' compensation Certiorari and mandamus Decision of Director of Conciliation and Review Directorate rejecting worker's application for Referral of Question of Degree of Disability (Form 22) Whether medical reports satisfy requirement of "medical evidence" for purposes of s 93D(6) Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981 (WA)
Legislation:	Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981 (WA), s 93D
Case References:	Re Monger; Ex parte Barminco Pty Ltd [2002] WASC 279 Re Monger; Ex parte Dutch & Ors (2001) 25 WAR 96 Re Monger; Ex parte Velsberry Pty Ltd [2003] WASCA 9 Re Monger; Ex parte WMC Resources Ltd & Anor [2002] WASCA 129 Bird v The Commonwealth (1988) 165 CLR 1 Thorp v Wanneroo City Council, unreported; CM (WA); 49/00; 31 July 2000

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : RE MONGER; EX PARTE MORGAN [2003] WASC 146 CORAM : ROBERTS-SMITH J HEARD : 18 JULY 2003 DELIVERED : 7 AUGUST 2003 FILE NO/S : CIV 1188 of 2003 MATTER : Application for a Writ of Certiorari and a Writ of Mandamus against MR ROSS MONGER, Director, Workcover Conciliation & Review EX PARTE

DENNIS MORGAN

Applicant

Catchwords:

Administrative law - Workers' compensation - Certiorari and mandamus - Decision of Director of Conciliation and Review Directorate rejecting worker's application for Referral of Question of Degree of Disability (Form 22) - Whether medical reports satisfy requirement of "medical evidence" for purposes of s 93D(6) Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981 (WA)

Legislation:

Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981 (WA), s 93D

Result:

Orders nisi for certiorari and mandamus discharged

(Page 2)

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant : Mr L Gandini

Solicitors:

Applicant : Chapmans

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

Re Monger; Ex parte Barminco Pty Ltd [2002] WASC 279
Re Monger; Ex parte Dutch & Ors (2001) 25 WAR 96
Re Monger; Ex parte Velsberry Pty Ltd [2003] WASCA 9
Re Monger; Ex parte WMC Resources Ltd & Anor [2002] WASCA 129

Case(s) also cited:

Bird v The Commonwealth (1988) 165 CLR 1
Thorp v Wanneroo City Council, unreported; CM (WA); 49/00; 31 July 2000

(Page 3)

1 ROBERTS-SMITH J: This is the return of an order nisi for writs of certiorari and mandamus against Mr Ross Monger, the Director, Workcover Conciliation & Review Directorate ("the Director") calling upon him to show cause why a certain decision made by him should not be quashed and an order absolute for mandamus should not be made.

2 The application is made pursuant to O 56 of the Rules of the Supreme Court ("RSC").

3 The order nisi was sought by application filed 25 February 2003 and supported by the affidavit of Rebecca Jane…

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 Monger

Details

AGLC: Re Monger [2003] WASC 146
Case: [2003] WASC 146
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case was heard by Roberts-Smith J in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The applicant, Dennis Morgan, sought an order absolute for certiorari and mandamus against the Director of Workcover Conciliation and Review, Ross Monger. The application was made following the Director's decision to reject the applicant's application for a referral of a question of degree of disability (Form 22) under the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981 (WA). The Director had determined that the medical reports provided by the applicant did not satisfy the requirement of "medical evidence" for the purposes of s 93D(6) of the Act.

The court considered the legal issues, including whether the Director's decision was correct and if the medical reports provided sufficient evidence to meet the statutory requirements. The court examined the relevant statutory provisions and previous case law to determine the proper construction of s 93D(6) of the Act.

Ultimately, the court found that the Director's decision was correct. The medical reports provided by the applicant did not meet the requirements of s 93D(6) of the Act. The court found that the Director was entitled to conclude that the medical evidence was not sufficient to indicate a permanent degree of disability or to support the opinions expressed in the reports. As a result, the orders nisi for writs of certiorari and mandamus were discharged.

Orders