Rowe v Capital Territory Health Commission

[1982] FCA 106

BETNEEN:

by t h e H o s p i t a l E m p l o y e e s Etc . --- (Nurs inq S t a f f ---___ A . C . T . ) Award

1980 ( " t h e A w a r d " ) f o r a s t u d e n t nurse . T h e r e s o l u t i o n of

t h a t i s s u e d e p e n d s u p o n w h e t h e r t h e r e l e v a n t s t u d e n t n u r s e

was	a n empl.oyee	o f	t h e	a p p e l l a n t ,	C a p i t a l	T e r r i t o r y	H e a i t h
Commission	( " t h e	C o m m i s s i o n " )	w h i c h ,	i n t e r	a l i a ,	c o n d u c t s	t h e

R o y a l	C a n b e r r a	H o s p i t a l ,	t h e	Woden	V a l l e y	H o s p i t a l	2nd	t h e
Al lambee	Nurs ing	Home.	T h e	s t u d e n t	n u r s e	i n v o l v e d	i n	t h e

f i r s t a p p e a l , A.C.T. No. 2 of 1982, is Miss Simms who was a

s tudenL unde r a t w o y e a r s u p e r n u m e r a r y g e n e r a l n u r s i n g

- c o d r a e . T h e s t u d e n t u r s e i n v o l v e d i n t h e s e c o n d a p p e e l ,

A.C.T. MC. 3 o f 1982, is Miss P f e i f f e r , who was a st\!de,lt

under	a	s u b s e q u e n t	h r e e	y e a r	s u p e r n u m e r a r y	g e n e r a l	n u r > l : : g
c o u r s e e

Mr. J u s t i c e K e e l y a t t h e f i r s t i n s t a n c e c o n c l u d e d

t h a t e a c h o f Miss Simms and Miss P f e i f f e r was an employee of

the Commiss ion . A s a consequence , h e h e l d t h a t e a c h was

e n t i t l e d t o b e p a i d t h e p r e s c r i b e d r a t e for a s t u d e n t n u c s e

u n d e r t h e Award. T h e r e was a c l e a r f a i l u r e by the Commission

t o p a y f o u n d , t h e m t h a t p r e s c r i b e d ra te . I t f o l l o w e d , so h i s Honour

t h a t t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a d , i n e a c h matter , b e e n g u i l t y

of a b r e a c h o f t h e Award. His Honour imposed, pursuant t o

t n e p r o v i s i o n s o f s.119 o f t h e C o n c i l i a t i o n a n d A r b i t r a t i o n -.

Act 1904, a p e n a l t y o f $500 i n e a c h case.

It has been submitted on behalf of the Commission that no contract at all existed between the Commission of the

one part or either of the student nurses’ of the other.

Alternatively, it was submitted that, if such a contract did

exist, the relevant student nurse was under no contractual

obligation to perform any work o r services for the

Commission. The relationship between the Commission and each

student nurse was, so it was said, the relationship of

educator or teacher and student. The activities of the

student nurses in the warc?s should be seen as involving no more than ?art of the teaching apd learning process and, specifically, as llot involving any relationship of service

between the Commission and n u r s e .

Subject to ‘cwo matters which are of but limited

significance to the ultimate outcome and to which we

subsequontly make specific reference, the conclusion which	we
have reached is that tne attack on the ~udgment	and decisjon
of Keely J. has not been made good in either appeal.	In O U T
view, there kas plainly a contractual relationship,involving
mutual rights and obligations, between the Commission	and the
student nurse in each matter.	We are unpersuaded that his

Honour fell into any error in his detailed statement of the particulzr work in the wards performed by Miss Simms and Miss Pfeiffer and of the facts and circumstances providing

the context in which thau work was performed.	We agree, f o r
the reasons he gave, with his Honour‘s conclusion that	t h e

consequence of h i s f i n d i n g s o f f a c t was t h a t e a c h of t h e

s t u d e n t n u r s e s was a n e m p l c y e e o f t h e C o m m j s s i o n e n t i t l e d t o

b e p a i d t h e r a t e p r e s c r i b e d f o r a s t u d e n t n u r s e by t h e Award.

The f i r s t o f t h e two p a r t i c u l a r m a t t e r s w h i c h we

have ment ioned is t h a t , i n t h e course of h i s j u d g m e n t , h i s

Honour exp res sed t he view t h a t :

' l . . . t h e g r a n t i n g o f a s c h o l a r s h i p - 2 s

._ d i s t i n c t f r o m t r a i n i n g fo r employees - for two

c c t h r e e y e a r s t o s t u d e n t n u r s e s who a r e under

n o o b l i g a t i o n t o work f o r t h e .. . commission

a f t e r t h e i r c o m p l e i i o n o f t h e i r c o u r s e is n o t

a u t h o r i s e d b y a n y t h e h e a d s o f p o w e r . "

c o n t a i n e d i n t h e H e a l t h C c m m i s s i o n O r d i n a n c e - J 9 7 5 . A s a t

p r e s e n t a d v i s e d , we d o n o t agree w i t h h i s H o n o u r ' s view i n

t h a t	r e g a r d .	I t	is,	h o w e v e r ,	u n n e c e s s a r y	t h a t	we	d e c i d e	:he
q u e s t i o n	s i n c e	w e	c o n s i d e r	t h a t ,	e v e n	i f	h i s	Honour	were

m i s t a k e n	on	t h a t	p o i n t ,	t h e	v a l i d i t y	of	t h e	s s e n t i 2 . i
r e a s o n i n g	o f	h i s	j u d g m e n t	a n d	of	t h e	ul t imate	c o n c l u s i o n

wh ich he r eached wou ld be una f fec t ed .

T h e s e c o n d mstter r e l a t e s h i s t o H o n o u r ' s

c o n c l u s i o n	t h a t :
"Miss Simms a n d Miss P f e i f f e r wfre b o t h
employees af t h e Cominiss ion by reason of the i r
c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g a L i o n t o p e r f o r m t h e i r d u t i e s
o f g i v i n g g e n e r a l n u r s i n g care tcj p a t i e n t s in
t h e hosp lka l wards , A l l ambee Nurs ing !Iome and
o t h e r p l a c e s . "

His H o n o u r ' s r e f e r e n c e t o " t h e i r c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g a t i o n t o

p e r f o r m t h e i r d u t i e s " n e e d s t o be r e a d i n t h e c o n t e x t of t h e

whole judgment . I t s h o u l d n o t h e read a s i n v o l v i n g a f i n d i n g

t h a t e i t h e r s t u d e n t nurse was an employee of t h e Commission

b y	r e a s o n	m e r e l y	o f	t h e	w r i t t e n	terms	a n d	c o n d i t i o n s	w h i c h
t h e	s t u d e n t	n u r s e	had	s i g n e d ,	o r	t h a t	t h e	q u e s t i o n	w h e t h e r

t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p of employer o r employee exis ts f e l l , i n t h e

p r e s e n t n a t t e r s , t o be d e t e r m i n e d m e r e l y by reference t o a n

a r i d i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f p r e - e x i s t i n g c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g a t i o n s .

The work of t h e two s t u d e n t n u r s e s i n t h e w a r d s was performed

under t h e c o n t r a c t w h i c h e x i s t e d b e t w e e n t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d

the r e l e v a n t s u d e n t u r s e . T h e r l a t i o n s h i p of se rv ice

between t h e Ccmmission	and	t h e	s t u d e n t n u r s e i n	each	case	was
more	t h e	r e s u l t of	t h e	a c t i n g o u t o f	t h e r e l e v a n t c o n t r a c t	by

t h e p e r f o r m a n c e cf t h a t work t h a n t h e r e s u l t o f a c y

p r e - e x i s t i n g c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g a t i o n t o perform it. A s Keely

J. p o i n t e d out, t h e C o u r t was e n t i t l e d a n d r e q u i r e d , i n t h e

p r e s e n t	ma t t e r s ,	t o	p a y	r e g e r d	t o	t h e	o v e r a l l	c i r c u m s t a n c e s
i n	d e t e r m i n i n g	t he	t rue	r e l a t i o n s h i p	of	t h e	parcies.	I n

p a s t i c u l a r , i t was e n t i t l e s t o p a y r e g a r d t o t h e n a t u r e a n d

e x t e n t o f t h e work actua1l .y performed by t h e r e l e v a n t s t u d e n t

n u r s e a n d the c i r c u m s t a n c e s a n d c o n t r o l i n a n d u n d e r w h i c h i t

was pe r fo rmed . So much, a t l e a s t , is made clear by what was

s a i d by t h e H i g h C o u r t i n - R . v . F o s t e r : Ex p a r t e T h e

- Commonwtalth L i f e (Amalgamated) Assurance L imi t ed - ( 1 9 5 2 ) 85

C.L.R. 133 a n d b y t h e P r i v y C o u n c i l i n A.M.P. S o c i e t y v.

Allan (1978) 52 A.L.J .R. 4 0 7 . We w o u l d a d d t h a t we d o n o t

c o n s i d e r t h a t n y t h i n g s a i d b y the P r i v y C o u n c i l i n t h e

A.M.P. S o c i e t y c a s e , s u p r a , u n d e r m i n e s o r d e t r a c t s f r o m t h e

f o l l o w i n g c o m m e n t s o f t h e C h i e f Justice o f t he Supreme Co l l i t

o f S o u t h Aus t ra l ia , Bray C . J . , i n t h a t case (g. v. - A l l a n : Ex I

p a r t e	A u s t r a l i a n	M u t u a l	P r o v i d e n t	S o c i e t x	( 1 9 6 8 )	16	S.A.S .R .
237,	a t p . 2 4 7 ) , w i t h w h i c h	we	a g r e e	-	and	I	q u o t e :

" T h e r e i s , o f c o u r s e , n o d o u b t t h a t t h e

S o c i e t y h a s d o p e i t s b e s t to make t h e c o n t r a c t

a c o n t r a c t f o r s e r v i c e s o r a c o u t r a c t o f

agency , no t a c o n t r a c t o f s e r v i c e . T h e b o o k l e t

s a y s s p e c i f i c a l l y t h a t t h e r l a t i o n s h i p

b e t w e e n	t h e	p a r t i e s	i s	t h a t	of	p r i n c i p a l	ar'd
a g e n t	a n d	n o t	t h a t	o f	m a s t e r	a n d	s e r v a n t .

T h i s	m i g h t	b e	of	e x t r e m e	i m p o r t a n c e ,	p e r h a p s
even	i n some	c a s e s	o f	d e c i s i v e	i m p o r t a n c e ,	if

it	were	p u r e l y	a	q u e s t i o n	of	t h e	p r i v a t e
r e l a t i o n s h i p	o	f	t h e	p a r t i e s	i n t e r	se.	R u t any

s u c h	e x p r e s s	d e c l a r a t i o n	c a n n o c	b i n d	t h i r d
p a r t i e s , n o r	can	it	b e d e c i s i v e	of	t h e q u e s t i f i n

o f t h e c a t e g o r y i n t o w h i c h t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p

f a l l s f o r t h e p u r p o s e of f i s c a l s e a t u t e s o r

s t a t u t e s o f s o c i a l , e c o n o m i c or i n d u s t r i a l

r e s u l a t i o a w h e r e q u e s t i o n s o f l e s i s l a t i v e

p o i i c y a r e i n v o l v e d : Ready Ilixcd - C o n c r e t e

--	(Sou th East)	L t d .	v.	Minister	o f P e n s i o n s a n d
-.

N a t i o n a l I n s u r a n c e ( 1 9 6 8 ) 2 Q.B. 4 9 7 ; Ferguson

v.	John	Dawson	&	P a r t n e r s ( C o n t r a c t 0 r s )	Ltd.
( 1 9 7 6 ) 1 W.L.R.	1213.	An	employer	can: lot	bs

a l l o w e d t o o p t o u t of t h e - p r o v i s i o n s o t

s t a t u t e s l i k e t h e Workmen's Compensation Act

o r t h e P a y r . 0 1 1 T a x A s s e s s m e n t Act by the

s imple	exped1e r . t	o?	e n t e T i n g	ir,t%-contracts
w i t h h i s	workmen	I n w h i c h t h e y a d m i t	t h a t	t h e y

are i n d e p e n d e n t c o n t r a c t o r s o r a g e n t s a n d n o t

s e r v a n t s . T h e p a r t j e s a r e f ree t o e n t e r i n t o

a c o n t r a c t of s e r v i c e o r n o t as t h e y please;

b u t t h e y c a n n o t e s c a p e s t a t u t o r y r e g u l a t i o n o f

contracts o f s e r v i c e by e n t e r i n g i n t o s u c h a

c o n t r a c t	a n d c a l l i n g	it	someth ing	e lse ."
Where,	as	i n t h e p r e s e n t	matters,	txamina t - ion of

t h e o v e r a l l c i r c u m s t a n c e s d i s c l o s e s t h a t , w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t

of	h e r	n u r s i n g	c o u r s e ,	t h e	r e l e v a n t	s t u d e n t	n i l e s e	was
performing	work	for	t h e	Commission	i n	a	r e l a t i o n s h i p	of

s e r v i c e ,	t h e f a c t	t h a t	t h e w r i t t e n	terms	a n d c o n d i t i o n s	which
t n e y	s i g n e d	were	c o n s i s t e n t w i t h a	mere	s t u d e n t	r e l a t i o n s h i p

d o e s n o t p r e c l u d e t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e work perfocmed by

t h e s t u d e n t n u r s e was per formed by her a s an employee .

...

I n r e p l y , s e n i o r c o u n s e l f o r t h e C o m m i s s i c n

s u b m i t t e d t h a t t h e f a c t t h a t t h e two s t u d e n t n u r s e s were

required t o o b t a i n some p rac t i ca l e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e wards t o

s a t i s f y	the	e d u c a t i o n a l	r e q u i r e m e n t s	o f	the	A.C.T.	Nurs ing
R e g u l a t i o n s	( R e g u l a t i o n s	7 ,	15	a n d	1 6 )	p r e v e n l e d	t h e

i m p l i c a t i o n of a c o n t r a c t or o f a r e l a t i o n s h i p of employee

and employer which would commonly r e s u l t f r o m t h e r e n d e r i n g

of	s e m i c o ,	u n d e r	c o n t r o l	a n d	s u p e r v i s i o n ,	b y	o n e	p a r t y	t o
a n o t h e r .	We	a r e	c o n s c i o u s	of	t h e	f o r c e	of	t h i s	u b m i s s i o n .
As we	h a v e	i n d i c a t e d	h o w e v e r ,	we	a r e of	t h e	v iew	tha t	the

r e l a t i o n s h i p	b e t w e e n	t h e	Commission	and	each	s t u d e x t	n u ~ s e
was,	f r o m	t h e	o u t s e t ,	c o n t r a c t u a l .	T h a t	cont rac t	may	wel l

h a v e b e e n t e r m i n a b l e a t w i l l by t h e s t u d e n t n u r s e . Whi le i t

s u b s i s t e d	h o w e v e r ,	the	work	i n t h e wards	was	done	under	i t .
T h e f a c t t h a t	t h e d o i n g of	much	of	t h e work	may	b e	s e e n a s	c

s t e p i n t h e p r o c e s s of g a i n i n g a q u a l i f i c a t i o n i s r c l c v a n t t o

whether o r n o t a r e l a t i o n s h i p of employer and employee

e x i s t e d . That. f a c t d o e s n o t h o w e v e r , n e c e s s a r i l y p r e c l u d e

. .

t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e work i n t h e w a r d s d o n e u n d e r t h e

c o n t r a c t b e t w e e n t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d t h e p a r t i c u l a r s t u d e n t

nurse was	of	s u c h a	n a t u r e	a n d	d o n e	i n	s u c h	c i r c u m s t a n c e s	a s
t o	l e a d	t o	a	f i n d i n g	t h a t	i t was done as a n	e m p l o y e e	o f	t h e

Commiss ion . As w e h a v e s a i d , we c o n s i d e r t h a t t h e

conc lus ion by Kee ly J. t h a t a t r e l e v a n t times e a c h s t u d e n t

n u r s e was w o r k i n g t h e i n w a r d s as a n e m p l o y e e t h e o f

Commiss ion was co r rec t i n t h e p a r t i c u l a r c i r c u m s t a n c e s of t h e

p r e s e n t matters.

S e n i o r c o u n s e l f u r t h e C o m m i s s i o n a r g u e d t h a t h e

t r i a l J u d g e was wrong i n law i n a d m i t t i n g i n t o e v i d e n c e or

p l a c i n g v e i g h t u p o n c e r t a i n mater ia l r e l a t i n g t o c o u r s e s

p r io r t o t h e t w o s u p e r n u m e r a r y c o u r s e s i n v o l v e d t h e i n

appeals.	We	a g r e e	t h a t	l i t t l e	a s s i s t a n c e	was	t o	b e	g a i n e d
f r o m t h a t t h a t his Honour was	m a t e r i a l .	I n	our	v iew	however ,	i t	c a n n o t	b e	s a i d

i n e r r o r i n a d m i t t i n g it i n t o e v i d e n c e .

Nor, upon a p r o p e r e a d i n g of h i s H o n o u r ' s j u d g m e n t , c a n i t

b e s a i d t h a t h e p l a c e d u n d u e r e l i a n c e u p o n it.

I t s h o u l d b e s t r e s s e d t h a t t h e d t c i s i o n i n e a c h of

t h e p r e s e n t matters i s b a s e d o n t h e n a t u r e a n d e x t e n t o i t h e

work p e r f o r m e d b y t h e r e l e v a n t s t u d e n t n u r s e a n d t h e

c i r c u m s t a n c e s s u r r o u n d i n g t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f t h a t work.

T h o s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n c l u d e t h e c o n t r a c t u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p

b e t w e e n t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d s t u d e n t n u r s e , the f a c t t h a t t h e

work	*as	p e r f o r m e d	u n d e r	t h a t	c o n t r a c t u a l	r e l a t i o n s h i p ,	:.he
f a c t	t h a t	t h a t	work, as Reely J.	f o u n d ,	c o n s t i L u t e d	p21-t	o f

t h e s e r v i c e s i:hich t h e C o l m i s s i o n p r o v i d e d t o its p a t i e n t s

a n d	t h e	financial	p a y c e n t s	which	the	Commission was, while
t h e	c o n t r a c t u a l	r e l a t i o n s h l p	s u b s i s t e d ,	o b l i g e d	t o make	t o

t h e s t u d r ; . n t n u r s e . I t would be a m i s t a k e to r e g a r d t h e

d e c i s i o n i n t h e p r e s e n t matters 8s b e j n g n e c e s s a r i l y r e . l c v ; - n t

t o	the	p o s i t i o n	of	t h o s e	r c a c e i v i n g	p r a c t i c a l	t r a i n i n g	f o r
o t h e r	o c c u p a % i o n s	or	t o	t h e	p o s i t i o n	of	s t u d e n t	I ~ U L S E S i n

d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s ; f o r e x a m p l e , o b t a i n i n g p r a c t i c a l

e x p e r i e n c e a t a h o s p i t a l as p a r l . c f t h e i r c o u r s e o f t r a i n i n g

a t a n i n d e p e n d e n t n u r s i n g c o l l e g e . N C T s h o u l d t h e d c c i s l o n

in 'Lhe p r e s e n t m a t t e r s bc s e e n a s i n v o l v i n g a n y view t h a i he

r a t e	p r e s c r i b e d	by	t h e	A ~ a r d f o r	a	s t u d e n t	n u r s e	i s
a p p r o p r i a t e	f o r	t h e	p d r t i c u l a r	p o s i t i o n	of	a	s l u d e n t	n u r s z ,

em o l l e d	i n clne	of	the	r e l e v a n t	c o u r s e s ,	who	hzs	r e a c h e d	t h e
s t a g e	\ h e r e	s h e	i s	p e r f o r m i n g	work,	in	a	r e l a t i o n s h i p	of

s e r v i c e ,	f o r	t h e	C o m m i s ~ i o n .	To	t h e	c o n t r a r y ,	~t would seen
t h a t v a r i a t i o n s	LO	t h e	Award	a r e d e s i r a b l e t o	ts?l:e	a c c o u n t	of

t h e p a r t i c u l a r p o s i t i o n s t u d e n t p u r s e s i n v o l v e d i n

s u p e r n u m e r s r y c o u r s e s of the t y p e i n v o l v e d .

In e a c h m k t t e r t h e a p p e a l i s d i s m l s s e d .

Y