So v So

The appeal in *So v So* concerned the interpretation of "wholly dependent for support" under section 25 of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* (NSW). The appellant, a child, sought compensation following the death of her mother, arguing she was wholly dependent on her mother for support. The primary judge had found that while the mother made some financial contribution, the child was primarily dependent on her father, and therefore not wholly dependent on her mother for the purposes of the Act.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether a dependant could be considered "wholly dependent" on one parent for the purposes of section 25 of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987*, even if another parent also contributed financially to their support. This required the court to consider the legislative history of the provision, including its United Kingdom antecedent, and its relationship with section 26 of the same Act. The court also had to determine if the primary judge's finding constituted an error of law for the purposes of section 32 of the *Compensation Court Act 1984* (NSW).

The Court of Appeal held that a dependant could be wholly dependent on both parents, notwithstanding a greater financial contribution from one parent. The test to be applied was whether the dependant relied on the equal and co-ordinate obligation of both parents being discharged. The court found that the primary judge had erred in law by applying an incorrect test, failing to consider the possibility of a child being wholly dependent on both parents. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and an award was made in favour of the appellant.