StateCover Mutual Ltd v Cameron

[2015] NSWCA 127

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	StateCover Mutual Ltd v Cameron [2015] NSWCA 127
Hearing dates:	7 May 2015
Decision date:	07 May 2015
Before:	Beazley P at [1], [22]; Basten JA at [2]; Ward JA at [21]
Decision:	1.Dismiss the appeal. 2.The appellant must pay both respondents’ costs in this Court, the second respondent’s costs to be assessed on the ordinary basis up to 8 March 2015 and on the indemnity basis from 9 March 2015.
Catchwords:	STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – “employment” – which of two meanings applied – whether words in other provision to be read into provision where not appearing – Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), s 18(1) WORKERS COMPENSATION – employer liable to pay compensation – identification of insurer – employee last exposed to relevant injury when first insurer on risk – different insurer on risk when employee ceased to be employed – Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), s 18(1)
Legislation Cited:	Workers Compensation Act 1926 (NSW), ss 7, 18 Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), ss 4, 9, 9A, 15, 17, 18, 151AB Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment Act 2012 (NSW), Sch 7 [1] WorkCover Legislation Amendment Act 1996 (NSW), Sch 1.2 [1]
Cases Cited:	Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd v Pomfret [2015] NSWCA 4 Blatchford v Staddon and Founds [1927] AC 461 CIC Workers’ Compensation (NSW) Ltd v Alcan Australia Ltd (1994) 35 NSWLR 169 Smith v Mann (1932) 47 CLR 426 University of New South Wales v AAI Ltd [2014] NSWCA 153
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	StateCover Mutual Ltd (Appellant) Rebecca Cameron as legal personal representative of the Estate of Alan Steere (First Respondent) AAI Ltd t/as GIO (Second Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr L King SC/Mr S Flett/Mr S Blount Mr P Morris SC/Mr L Morgan (First Respondent) Mr A R Moses SC/Mr A B Parker/Mr R L Gall (Second Respondent) Solicitors: David Allen Legal (Appellant) Carroll & O’Dea (First Respondent) Thompson Cooper (Second Respondent)
File Number(s):	2014/255963
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Workers Compensation Commission Citation: [2014] NSWWCCPD 49 Date of Decision: 4 August 2014 Before: Deputy President Roche File Number(s): A1-559/13

Judgment

1. BEAZLEY P: I agree with the reasons of Basten JA. Not only as his Honour points out, is the language of s 18(1) unambiguous, the section uses very different language to the language of earlier sections including s 15(1)(b) upon which the appellant placed emphasis. In particular the phrase in s 18 “before the worker ceased to be employed by the employer”, a phrase which is used twice, is unambiguous in itself. It is also unambiguously different from the phrase that the appellant sought to have implied into the section, namely that the words “in employment to the nature of which the disease was due” should be inserted after the word “employer”. Nothing has been advanced to persuade me that the clear words of s 18(1), with its stated purpose, ought to have words implied into it as submitted by the appellant. I agree with the…