Sabanayagam v St George Bank Ltd

The appeal concerned a dispute between Mr Sabanayagam (the worker) and St George Bank Ltd (the insurer) regarding the termination of weekly compensation payments. The worker challenged the insurer's decision to cease payments after 130 weeks. The primary legal question before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales was whether the Workers Compensation Commission had jurisdiction to hear the worker's challenge, given the provisions of section 43 of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* (NSW).

The court was required to determine whether the insurer's decision to terminate weekly compensation payments after 130 weeks constituted a "work capacity decision" within the meaning of the Act. Further, the court had to consider whether, if it was a work capacity decision, the Commission was deprived of jurisdiction to determine the worker's challenge by section 43(1) and (3) of the Act. The court also had to assess whether the insurer was authorised to make the decision and whether the decision fell within the categories of a "decision to dispute liability" under section 43(2)(a) or a "decision that can be the subject of a medical dispute" under section 43(2)(b).

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the insurer's decision to terminate payments after 130 weeks was a work capacity decision. It held that such a decision was not one that the insurer was authorised to make under the Act, and therefore, the jurisdictional bar in section 43(1) and (3) did not apply. The court found that the insurer's action was not a decision to dispute liability or a decision subject to a medical dispute, but rather an unauthorised termination of payments. Consequently, the Commission retained jurisdiction to determine the worker's challenge.

The appeal was allowed, the previous orders of the Commission and the Arbitrator were set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Commission for determination. The respondent insurer was ordered to pay the appellant worker's costs of the appeal.