Beazley JA at [1]; Basten JA at [2]; Macfarlan JA at [74]
Decision:
(1) Dismiss the appeal from the judgment and orders of the District Court delivered and made by Judge Truss on 11 November 2011.
(2) Lift the stay on past payments of compensation and expenses imposed by the trial judge by order dated 9 December 2011.
(3) Order the appellant to pay the respondent's costs in this Court.
[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:
APPEAL - constructive failure to exercise jurisdiction - failure by trial judge to consider relevant, uncontested evidence - whether failure to consider material amounts to an error of law.
APPEAL - failure to give proper reasons - variable nature of obligation to give reasons - minimum acceptable standard of reasons - discussion of Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247.
WORKERS' COMPENSATION - coal miner matter - psychological or psychiatric disorder arising out of employment - total incapacity.
[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 Resource Pacific Pty Ltd v Wilkinson
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Resource Pacific Pty Ltd v Wilkinson [2013] NSWCA 33
Case
[2013] NSWCA 33
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Resource Pacific Pty Ltd (the appellant) appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of Judge Truss in the District Court. The dispute concerned a claim for workers' compensation by Mr Wilkinson (the respondent), a coal miner, who alleged he suffered a psychological or psychiatric disorder arising out of his employment, resulting in total incapacity.
The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the trial judge had constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction by failing to consider relevant, uncontested evidence, and whether such a failure constituted an error of law. Additionally, the Court considered whether the trial judge had failed to give proper reasons for their decision, and what the minimum acceptable standard of reasons was in this context, referencing the principles established in *Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd*.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge had not constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction. The judges reasoned that while the trial judge's reasons might have been brief, they were sufficient to indicate the basis of the decision and that the judge had indeed considered the evidence presented. The Court clarified that the obligation to give reasons is variable and depends on the circumstances, but a minimum standard requires the reasons to disclose the reasoning process and the material considered. The Court also lifted a stay on past payments of compensation and expenses that had been imposed by the trial judge.
The appeal was dismissed, the stay on past payments of compensation and expenses was lifted, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs in the Court of Appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) Dismiss the appeal from the judgment and orders of the District Court delivered and made by Judge Truss on 11 November 2011.
(2) Lift the stay on past payments of compensation and expenses imposed by the trial judge by order dated 9 December 2011.
(3) Order the appellant to pay the respondent's costs in this Court.
[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.]