SAS Trustee Corporation v Rossetti

The SAS Trustee Corporation (STC) appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against decisions made by Associate Justice Harrison concerning the jurisdiction to review certain decisions under the *Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906* (NSW). The dispute centred on whether the Supreme Court, or alternatively the District Court, possessed the jurisdiction to review decisions made by the STC regarding members of the police force who were injured on duty.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to review STC decisions under section 10B of the *Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906* (NSW), as conferred by section 88 of the *Superannuation Administration Act 1996* (NSW), or whether such jurisdiction was vested in the District Court pursuant to section 21(1) of the *Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906* (NSW). This involved interpreting the legislative scheme for the review of compensation claims for police officers injured on duty, particularly the effect of amendments that transferred review functions from the Industrial Court.

The Court of Appeal considered the legislative history and the second reading speeches of the relevant Acts to interpret the statutory provisions. It determined that the scheme established by the legislation created a bifurcated review process. The Court concluded that the phrase "decision made by STC on a matter that arises under this Act by reason of a member of the police force being hurt on duty" in section 21(1)(a) of the *Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906* (NSW) vested jurisdiction in the District Court, not the Supreme Court. Consequently, the Supreme Court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the application.

The appeal was allowed, and the orders made by Associate Justice Harrison on 15 June 2017 were set aside. In lieu thereof, the application was dismissed, and the appellant, STC, was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal and of the proceedings before Associate Justice Harrison.