The Nominal Defendant v Morrison, R

The parties involved in this case are The Nominal Defendant, representing the Commonwealth, and Morrison, an employee of the Commonwealth, who was injured in a road accident caused by another Commonwealth employee. The dispute concerns whether the Commonwealth is liable for the injuries sustained by Morrison and whether the provisions of the Commonwealth Employees' Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 preclude a claim against the Commonwealth and the at-fault employee under the Motor Traffic Act 1936 (ACT). The case was heard by the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether Morrison's claim against The Nominal Defendant was a derivative of the cause of action in tort and whether sections 44 and 45 of the Compensation Act eliminate any causes of action against the Commonwealth as employer and against the fellow employee. The Court had to determine if the statutory compensation scheme provided by the Compensation Act was exclusive and if it effectively precluded common law actions against the Commonwealth and the employee.

The Court concluded that the statutory compensation scheme under the Compensation Act was intended to be exclusive, and sections 44 and 45 of the Act did eliminate causes of action against the Commonwealth as employer and against the fellow employee. The Court found that Morrison's claim against The Nominal Defendant was indeed a derivative of the cause of action in tort. Therefore, the Court ruled that the answer to the special case question posed by the primary judge should be "no".

The Court granted leave to appeal and allowed the appeal, ruling that Morrison's claim against The Nominal Defendant was precluded by the Compensation Act. The Court ordered that the document filed on 10 January 1992 as a Notice of Appeal stand as the Notice of Appeal and that the appeal be allowed. The Court also directed that the question posed by the special case be answered "no" in place of the answer given by the primary judge. The settlement and entry of orders were to be dealt with in accordance with Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.