Shipley v Visscher Caravelle Australia Pty Limited

Shipley sought a review of a decision by the Workers Compensation Claims Review Panel. The dispute centred around the interpretation of the Workers Compensation Act and the drawing of inferences from the evidence. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The legal issues before the court were whether the Workers Compensation Claims Review Panel erred in fact and whether they should have drawn an inference from the evidence that the applicant's injury was caused by an accident arising out of or in the course of employment.

The court found that there was no factual error in the decision of the Workers Compensation Claims Review Panel. However, the court held that the Panel should have drawn an inference from the evidence that the applicant's injury was caused by an accident arising out of or in the course of employment. The court cited Whiteley Muir & Zwanenberg Ltd v Kerr, which established that factual errors may be reviewed by the court, and Luxton v Vines, which held that the drawing of inferences from the evidence is a matter for the trier of fact. The court also cited Fuller-Lyons v New South Wales and Flounders v Millar, which provided guidance on the application of these principles in the context of workers compensation claims.

The court found that the Workers Compensation Claims Review Panel had failed to draw the inference that the applicant's injury was caused by an accident arising out of or in the course of employment, despite the evidence supporting such an inference. The court held that this was an error of law and remitted the matter to the Workers Compensation Claims Review Panel for reconsideration. The court did not make any final orders in this case, as the matter was remitted for reconsideration by the Workers Compensation Claims Review Panel.