Slater v Telstra

[2004] FCA 476

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Slater v Telstra [2004] FCA 476

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Worker’s Compensation – appeal from the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal after remittal by the Full Court of the Federal Court – appeal lies only on questions of law – appeal substantially challenges findings of fact - ordinary requirements of fresh evidence

Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) ss 14 and 19
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 44

Waterford v The Commonwealth of Australia (1986-1987) 163 CLR 54 followed
Commissioner of Taxation v Glennan (1999) 90 FCR 538 referred to
Casarotto v Australian Postal Commission (1989) 86 ALR 399 considered
Servos v Repatriation Commission (1995) 129 ALR 509 followed
Orr v Holmes (1948) 76 CLR 632 referred to
Florance v Andrew (1984-1985) 58 ALR 377 followed

Campbell and Waller, Principles of Evidence and Administrative Tribunals, (ed) “Well and Truly Tried” Monash Studies in Law (1982)

GORDON SLATER v TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED

Q 121 of 2002

SPENDER J
BRISBANE
23 APRIL 2004

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY	Q 121 OF 2002

ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL CONSTITUTED BY MEMBER R.G. KENNY

BETWEEN:	GORDON SLATER APPLICANT
AND:	TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	BRISBANE
DATE OF ORDER:	23 APRIL 2004
WHERE MADE:	BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the respondent’s costs, to be taxed if not agreed.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY	Q 121 OF 2002

ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL CONSTITUTED BY MEMBER R.G. KENNY

BETWEEN:	GORDON SLATER APPLICANT
AND:	TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	BRISBANE
DATE:	23 APRIL 2004
PLACE:	BRISBANE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This application is an appeal from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) constituted by a Member, Mr R.G. Kenny, given on 19 July 2002.  The decision of the Tribunal was:

   ‘The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and, in substitution therefore, decides that:

   (a)the respondent is liable, pursuant to section 14 of the Act, to pay compensation to the applicant in respect of his left knee injury; and

   (b)the respondent is liable, pursuant to section 19 of the Act, to pay to the applicant compensation in the amount of $19.82 per week for the period from 1 October 1997 until 31 August 1998.’

2. The matters the Tribunal had to consider, in the proceedings leading to that decision, were matters which were remitted by the Full Court of the Federal Court to the Tribunal by orders made on 11 October 2001.

3. It is necessary to set out the extensive history of the matter.

4. Mr Gordon Slater (“the applicant”) was an employee of the respondent, Telstra Corporation Limited (“Telstra”) on a fixed-term contract for the period 4 July 1996 to 4 January 1997.  On 11 July 1996 the applicant sustained an injury to his left knee in the course of his employment with Telstra.…