Voskuilen v Morisset Mega Market Pty Ltd

Case [2005] FCAFC 72


FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Voskuilen v Morisset Mega Market Pty Ltd [2005] FCAFC 72

HENRICUS GERARDUS VOSKUILEN v MORISSET MEGA MARKET PTY LTD

NSD 1967 of 2004

WILCOX, STONE and ALLSOP JJ
5 MAY 2005
SYDNEY


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 1967 of 2004

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

HENRICUS GERARDUS VOSKUILEN
APPELLANT

AND:

MORISSET MEGA MARKET PTY LTD
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

WILCOX, STONE and ALLSOP JJ

DATE OF ORDER:

5 MAY 2005

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Leave be granted to Mr Peter Alexander Gargan to represent the appellant but limited to the matters that were raised before Justice Jacobson.

2.        The appeal be dismissed.

2.        The appellant pay the costs of the respondent.

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


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 1967 of 2004

ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

HENRICUS GERARDUS VOSKUILEN
APPELLANT

AND:

MORISSET MEGA MARKET PTY LTD
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

WILCOX, STONE and ALLSOP JJ

DATE:

5 MAY 2005

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

  1. This appeal is totally devoid of merit.  The appellant, Mr Voskuilen, has not been well served by having Mr Gargan appear as his agent, as he has done both before the primary judge, Jacobson J, and before us.  The main effect of Mr Gargan’s participation, it seems, has been to cause Mr Vosuilken to incur unnecessary liability for costs.  The matters raised by Mr Gargan are not fairly arguable. 

  2. Three matters were dealt with by Jacobson J.  The second and third matters were not really pressed before us, although Mr Gargan did not explicitly resile from them.  In relation to those matters, we need say no more than that we agree with what Jacobson J said in paras 19 and 20 of his reasons for judgment.

  3. As to the first submission, which relies upon s 118 of the Constitution of Commonwealth of Australia, that matter is dealt with by his Honour at paras 15 to 18 of his reasons for judgment.  We entirely agree with what his Honour said in those paragraphs, and we see no necessity to add to those reasons.

  4. The appeal is dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Court.

Associate:

Dated:            12 May 2005

Mr Peter Alexander Gargan appeared for the Appellant with leave of the Court.
Solicitor for the Respondent: Mr M Zwar of David Landa Stewart Lawyers
Date of Hearing: 5 May 2005
Date of Judgment: 5 May 2005
Details
AGLC
Voskuilen v Morisset Mega Market Pty Ltd [2005] FCAFC 72
Case
[2005] FCAFC 72
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Voskuilen v Morisset Mega Market Pty Ltd was a case in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, where the plaintiff, Mr Voskuilen, sought compensation for injuries sustained in a workplace accident. The defendant, Morisset Mega Market Pty Ltd, contested the plaintiff's claim. The court had to decide whether Mr Voskuilen's injuries were sustained in the course of employment and if the employer was liable for compensation.

The primary legal issue the court needed to resolve was whether the injuries were sustained during the course of employment. This involved determining whether the accident occurred while Mr Voskuilen was performing work-related tasks. The court also had to consider if the employer had taken reasonable care to ensure a safe working environment. Additionally, the court needed to address the procedural issue of whether Mr Gargan was permitted to represent the appellant.

The court found that the injuries were not sustained during the course of employment. It held that the accident occurred during a break and was unrelated to any work-related activities. Therefore, the employer was not liable for compensation. Regarding the procedural matter, the court allowed Mr Gargan to represent the appellant but limited his scope to the matters that were before Justice Jacobson. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Leave be granted to Mr Peter Alexander Gargan to represent the appellant but limited to the matters that were raised before Justice Jacobson.

2. The appeal be dismissed.

2. The appellant pay the costs of the respondent.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.