Secora APII Pty Ltd v Fiddes

Secora APII Pty Ltd v Fiddes was a case in the New South Wales Court of Appeal concerning the death of a worker. The dispute involved whether the worker's employment impaired his diet and sleep, leading to his death. The case required the court to decide on the evidentiary weight of slight knowledge, the common knowledge regarding the impact of remote work travel on diet and sleep, and whether there was an error in the determination of a substantial contributing factor under section 9A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.

The legal issues before the court included whether the deceased’s employment impaired his diet and sleep to a degree that could be inferred as a contributing factor to his death. The court examined the application of Fuller-Lyons v State of New South Wales (No 3) [2013] NSWSC 1672 and Holland v Jones [1917] HCA 26 in determining the effect of slight knowledge when uncontradicted. It also considered whether the Member of the Workers Compensation Commission had correctly engaged with the evaluative exercise required by the phrase ‘main contributing factor’ in section 4(b) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.

The court found that the inference that the deceased’s employment impaired his diet and sleep was neither glaringly improbable nor contrary to compelling inferences. It held that the Court of Appeal had not properly weighed the conflicting evidence and drawn its own inferences and conclusions. The court determined that the Member of the Workers Compensation Commission had not correctly applied the evaluative exercise required by section 4(b) of the Act, leading to an error in the determination of the substantial contributing factor.

The final orders of the court were not explicitly detailed in the provided text, but it was noted that the appellant's second ground was made good, indicating a favourable outcome for the appellant in this regard.