FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Romano v Comcare [2025] FCA 446
Appeal from: Romano and Comcare (Administrative Review Tribunal, No 2022/4244, Orders dated 5 November 2024) File number: SAD 250 of 2024 Judgment of: VANDONGEN J Date of judgment: 5 May 2025 Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - employment and industrial relations - appeal from decision of Administrative Review Tribunal affirming respondent's denial of present liability for medical expenses and incapacity payments in respect of injury sustained by applicant - expert evidence - whether Tribunal erred by failing to explain the reasons for its decision as required by s 111(2) of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) Legislation: Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) ss 4, 12, 105, 111, 172
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) (repealed) s 43
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (Cth) Schedule 17 (item 1)
Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) ss 16, 19, Part VI
Cases cited: HSCK v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FCAFC 17
Division: General Division Registry: South Australia National Practice Area: Employment and Industrial Relations Number of paragraphs: 22 Date of hearing: Determined on the papers Counsel for the Applicant: Mr A Wright Solicitor for the Applicant: WK Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Ms KL Bradey Solicitor for the Respondent: McInnes Wilson Lawyers ORDERS
SAD 250 of 2024 BETWEEN: MARIO ROMANO
Applicant
AND: COMCARE
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
VANDONGEN J
DATE OF ORDER:
5 MAY 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The hearing of the appeal on 4 June 2025 is vacated.
2.The appeal is allowed.
3.The decision of the Administrative Review Tribunal dated 5 November 2024 is set aside.
4.The matter is remitted to a differently constituted Tribunal to make a decision according to law.
5.The respondent is to pay the applicant's costs of this appeal, as between party and party, as agreed or assessed as per orders 6 and 7.
6.In default of the parties reaching agreement as to the costs payable pursuant to order 5 by 30 May 2025, pursuant to r 40.02 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the costs payable pursuant to order 5 are to be determined on a lump sum basis by a registrar acting as a referee after receiving written submissions of no more than three pages and any affidavit from each of the parties in accordance with a timetable to be set by the registrar.
7.Subject to further order, the question whether the registrar's report as referee should be adopted will be considered by the case managing judge on the papers that were before the registrar acting as referee.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
VANDONGEN J:
Pursuant to s 172 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) (ART Act), the appellant appeals from a decision of a senior member of the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART
Continue reading Romano v Comcare
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Romano v Comcare [2025] FCA 446
- Case
- [2025] FCA 446
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court identified that the Tribunal had failed to provide a clear explanation of the reasons for its decision, which was a fundamental requirement under the legislation. This omission was significant as it prevented the applicant from understanding the basis on which the Tribunal had reached its conclusion. The court held that the failure to provide adequate reasons rendered the Tribunal's decision unlawful and insufficient for effective judicial review. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the decision of the Administrative Review Tribunal was set aside.
In light of the findings, the court ordered that the matter be remitted to a differently constituted Tribunal for a fresh decision according to law. Additionally, the court ruled that the respondent would be responsible for paying the applicant's costs of the appeal, with provisions for the assessment of these costs if the parties could not agree. The court also specified the process for determining these costs if the parties failed to reach an agreement by a specified date. The final orders included a directive for the case managing judge to consider the registrar's report as referee and provided a framework for the entry of these orders in accordance with the Federal Court Rules 2011.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The hearing of the appeal on 4 June 2025 is vacated.
2. The appeal is allowed.
3. The decision of the Administrative Review Tribunal dated 5 November 2024 is set aside.
4. The matter is remitted to a differently constituted Tribunal to make a decision according to law.
5. The respondent is to pay the applicant's costs of this appeal, as between party and party, as agreed or assessed as per orders 6 and 7.
6. In default of the parties reaching agreement as to the costs payable pursuant to order 5 by 30 May 2025, pursuant to r 40.02 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the costs payable pursuant to order 5 are to be determined on a lump sum basis by a registrar acting as a referee after receiving written submissions of no more than three pages and any affidavit from each of the parties in accordance with a timetable to be set by the registrar.
7. Subject to further order, the question whether the registrar's report as referee should be adopted will be considered by the case managing judge on the papers that were before the registrar acting as referee.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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.