Sapina v Coles Myer Limited

The appeal concerned a decision of the Workers Compensation Commission in New South Wales. The appellant, Sapina, sought to challenge a decision made by a Presidential Member of the Commission, which had reviewed an Arbitrator's determination. The respondent was Coles Myer Limited.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was the nature and scope of the review power exercised by a Presidential Member of the Workers Compensation Commission under sections 352 and 353 of the *Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998* (NSW). Specifically, the court had to determine whether the Presidential Member's task was to conduct a fresh hearing or to simply review the Arbitrator's decision for error. The court also considered the meaning of "review" and "appeal by way of review" in the context of the Act.

The Court of Appeal held that the task of a Presidential Member conducting a review under the relevant sections of the Act was to determine what was the "true and correct" decision. This involved undertaking a fresh consideration of the evidence and the law, rather than merely identifying errors in the Arbitrator's reasoning. The court found that the Acting President had erred in his approach to the review. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the orders of the Acting President were set aside, and the proceedings were remitted to the Workers Compensation Commission for determination according to law by a Presidential Member. The respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal.