Legal Research
Cases
Whitehaven Coal Mining Ltd v Pain

Whitehaven Coal Mining Ltd v Pain

Case [2018] NSWCA 229 18 October 2018

Appeal

Remedies

Statutory Construction

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Whitehaven Coal Mining Limited v Pain [2018] NSWCA 229
Hearing dates: 11 July 2018
Decision date: 18 October 2018
Before: White JA at [1];
Emmett AJA at [56];
Simpson AJA at [66]
Decision:
Appeal dismissed with costs.

Catchwords: WORKERS COMPENSATION – Weekly and lump sum compensation – Where employee worked in coal mine – Appeal in point of law – Whether primary judge erred in awarding weekly compensation for partial incapacity the full amount of the difference between the probable weekly amount but for the injury and the average weekly amount he was able to earn – Where exercise of discretion as to proper difference was not in dispute at trial – Appeal dismissed
Legislation Cited: District Court Act 1973 (NSW), ss 142G, 142N
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 75A
Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), ss 4, 9, 66, 67, Sch 6
Workers’ Compensation Act 1926 (NSW), ss 6, 9, 11
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW), ss 323, 352, 353
Cases Cited: Australian Wheat Board v Pantaleo [1984] 3 NSWLR 530
Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Ltd (1985) 4 NSWLR 139
Bruce v Cole (1998) 45 NSWLR 163; [1998] NSWCA 45
Commissioner for Railways v Bain (1965) 112 CLR 246; [1965] HCA 5
Currie v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue [1921] 2 KB 332
Darling Island Stevedoring and Lighterage Co Ltd v Hussey (1959) 102 CLR 482; [1959] HCA 55
Dennis v Watt (1942) 43 SR (NSW) 32
Farrell v Metromix Pty Ltd [2001] NSWCA 166
Favelle Mort Ltd v Murray (1976) 133 CLR 580; [1976] HCA 13
Ferella v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2014] NSWCA 378; [2014] 96 ATR 875
Goodwin v Commissioner of Police [2012] NSWCA 379
Gregory R Ball Pty Ltd v Stead (1993) 9 NSWCCR 148
Haider v JP Morgan Holdings Aust Ltd t/as JP Morgan Operations Australia Ltd [2007] NSWCA 158
Hume v Walton [2005] NSWCA 148
Kesen v Luke Singer Pty Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 566
Lawrence v Carroll [1998] NSWCA 129
Mitchell v Central West Health Service (1997) 14 NSWCCR 526
Ormwave Pty Ltd v Smith [2007] NSWCA 210; [2007] 5 DDCR 180
Resource Pacific Pty Ltd v Wilkinson [2013] NSWCA 33
Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247
State Super SAS Trustee Corporation v Cornes [2013] NSWCA 257
Tritton v Clarke [2018] NSWCCA 31
Tudor Capital Australia Pty Ltd v Christensen [2017] NSWCA 260
Wingfoot Australian Partners Pty Ltd v Kocak (2013) 252 CLR 480; [2013] HCA 43
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Whitehaven Coal Mining Limited (Appellant)
Craig Allan Pain (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
M Joseph SC (Appellant)
I D Roberts SC with D R Benson (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Hicksons Lawyers (Appellant)
Slater & Gordon Lawyers (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2017/353606
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court of New South Wales

Jurisdiction:

Civil

Citation:

n/a

Date of Decision:

26 October 2017

Before:

Ashford ADCJ

File Number(s):

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Whitehaven Coal Mining Ltd v Pain

Details

AGLC: Whitehaven Coal Mining Limited v Pain [2018] NSWCA 229
Case: [2018] NSWCA 229
Decision Date: 18 October 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Whitehaven Coal Mining Ltd appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of the primary judge who had awarded weekly compensation for partial incapacity to Mr Pain, an employee who had worked in a coal mine. The dispute concerned the calculation of the amount of weekly compensation payable.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge had erred in law by awarding weekly compensation for partial incapacity in the full amount of the difference between the probable weekly earnings of Mr Pain but for his injury and his actual average weekly earnings post-injury. The appeal was specifically limited to a point of law, with the exercise of discretion regarding the proper difference not being in dispute at the trial.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The judges found no error of law in the primary judge's determination. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed with costs.

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Whitehaven Coal Mining Limited v Pain [2018] NSWCA 229

Most Recent Citation

Junn v McBride [2018] NSWDC 325

Cases citing this decision · 5 of 5 shown

DJ & LJ Norman Pty Ltd v Sheather
[2022] NSWSC 1299 Para 98

…More recently, in Whitehaven Coal Mining Ltd v Pain [2018] NSWCA 229, White JA (with whom Emmett and Simpson AJJA agreed) stated at [29] that “where a finding depends upon the decision-maker’s assessment of the relative importance and significance of facts found the ultimate determination is one of fact”. This stat…
Precision Flooring Pty Ltd v Armstrong
[2021] NSWSC 844 Para 75

…Similarly, the drawing of an inference without evidence to support it is an error of law: Bruce at 188; Whitehaven Coal Mining Ltd v Pain [2018] NSWCA 229 (“ Whitehaven ”) at [29] (per White JA, with whom Emmett and Simpson AJJA agreed).…
Roude v Helwani
[2020] NSWCA 310 Para 6

…lity of the evidence adduced, then it would not raise a question of law as distinct from a question of fact ( Whitehaven Coal Mining Ltd v Pain [2018] NSWCA 229 at [28]-[29]). In McPhee v S Bennett Ltd (1934) 52 WN (NSW) 8 Jordan CJ said (at 9) that:…
Hochbaum v RSM Building Services Pty Ltd; Whitton v Technical and Further Education Commission t/as TAFE NSW
[2020] NSWCA 113 Para 75

…(2019) 287 IR 200; [2019] NSWCA 175; Pacific National Pty Ltd v Baldacchino (2018) 98 NSWLR 483; [2018] NSWCA 281; Whitehaven Coal Mining Ltd v Pain [2018] NSWCA 229; Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCA 88; Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd v Belokoski [2017] NSWCA 313.…
Junn v McBride
[2018] NSWDC 325

…Plan 36957 [2006] NSWCA 278; (2006) 67 NSWLR 321 Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 Whitehaven Coal Mining v Pain [2018] NSWCA 229 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Donald Martin Junn (Plaintiff) Louise McBride (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr SJ Philips (Plaintiff) Mr FM Douglas…

View all 5 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 24 of 24 shown

Tritton v Clarke
[2018] NSWCCA 31 Para 29

…on is one of fact ( Currie v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue [1921] 2 KB 332 at 336; Dennis v Watt (1942) 43 SR (NSW) 32 at 32; Tritton v Clarke [2018] NSWCCA 31 at [26]-[30]).…
Tudor Capital Australia Pty Limited v Christensen
[2017] NSWCA 260 Para 28

…tion v Cornes [2013] NSWCA 257 at [11]-[12]; Goodwin v Commissioner of Police [2012] NSWCA 379 at [20]; Tudor Capital Australia Pty Ltd v Christensen [2017] NSWCA 260 at [298]). Where an appeal lies on an error of law, there is an error of law if the decision-maker does not disclose his or her path of reasoning to…
Ferella v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue
[2014] NSWCA 378 Para 26

…Most of the grounds in the amended notice of appeal do not identify a point of law. In Ferella v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2014] NSWCA 378; [2014] 96 ATR 875, where the appeal lay on a question of law, Leeming JA said (at [6]):…
Wingfoot Australia Partners Pty Ltd v Kocak
[2013] HCA 43 Para 28

…rmine whether the decision-maker did make an error of law in reaching the decision ( Wingfoot Australian Partners Pty Ltd v Kocak (2013) 252 CLR 480; [2013] HCA 43 at [55]; Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 at 274, 281-2).…
State Super SAS Trustee Corporation v Cornes
[2013] NSWCA 257 Para 28

…risdiction to decide a necessary question ( Resource Pacific Pty Ltd v Wilkinson [2013] NSWCA 33 at [9]; State Super SAS Trustee Corporation v Cornes [2013] NSWCA 257 at [11]-[12]; Goodwin v Commissioner of Police [2012] NSWCA 379 at [20]; Tudor Capital Australia Pty Ltd v Christensen [2017] NSWCA 260 at [298]). Wh…
Resource Pacific Pty Ltd v Wilkinson
[2013] NSWCA 33 Para 28

…es that the judge has constructively failed to exercise his or her jurisdiction to decide a necessary question ( Resource Pacific Pty Ltd v Wilkinson [2013] NSWCA 33 at [9]; State Super SAS Trustee Corporation v Cornes [2013] NSWCA 257 at [11]-[12]; Goodwin v Commissioner of Police [2012] NSWCA 379 at [20]; Tudor…
Goodwin v Commissioner of Police
[2012] NSWCA 379 Para 28

…Ltd v Wilkinson [2013] NSWCA 33 at [9]; State Super SAS Trustee Corporation v Cornes [2013] NSWCA 257 at [11]-[12]; Goodwin v Commissioner of Police [2012] NSWCA 379 at [20]; Tudor Capital Australia Pty Ltd v Christensen [2017] NSWCA 260 at [298]). Where an appeal lies on an error of law, there is an error of law…
Ormwave Pty Ltd v Smith
[2007] NSWCA 210 Para 29

…88-9; [1998] NSWCA 45; Haider v JP Morgan Holdings Aust Ltd t/as JP Morgan Operations Australia Ltd [2007] NSWCA 158 at [33]; Ormwave Pty Ltd v Smith [2007] NSWCA 210 at [14]). It has been said that drawing an inference from facts that are not reasonably capable of supporting the inference is an error of law ( Haid…
Haider v JP Morgan Holdings Aust Ltd t/as JP Morgan Operations Australia Ltd
[2007] NSWCA 158 Para 29

…ror of law ( Bruce v Cole (1998) 45 NSWLR 163 at 188-9; [1998] NSWCA 45; Haider v JP Morgan Holdings Aust Ltd t/as JP Morgan Operations Australia Ltd [2007] NSWCA 158 at [33]; Ormwave Pty Ltd v Smith [2007] NSWCA 210 at [14]). It has been said that drawing an inference from facts that are not reasonably capable of…
Hume v Walton
[2005] NSWCA 148 Para 33

…mitted that the primary judge was required to provide reasons of the kind it contended for by reference to observations of McColl JA in Hume v Walton [2005] NSWCA 148 at [69] where her Honour said:…
Bright v Joodie Holdings No 2 Pty Ltd
[2005] NSWCA 134 Para 33

…[2003] NSWCA 292 ; (2003) 129 LGERA 311 at [54] per Sheller JA (with whom Beazley JA agreed); see also Bright v Joodie Holdings No 2 Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 134 at [33] per Santow JA (with whom Sheller JA and Campbell AJA agreed).”…
Archibald v Byron Shire Council
[2003] NSWCA 292

…sed before the Court and to an explanation by the judge as to why the judge prefers one case over the other’: Archibald v Byron Shire Council [2003] NSWCA 292 ; (2003) 129 LGERA 311 at [54] per Sheller JA (with whom Beazley JA agreed); see also Bright v Joodie Holdings No 2 Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 134 at [33] per Sant…
Farrell v Metromix Pty Ltd
[2001] NSWCA 166 Para 49

…v Luke Singer Pty Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 566 at 567; Mitchell v Central West Health Service (1997) 14 NSWCCR 526 at 529-530; Farrell v Metromix Pty Ltd [2001] NSWCA 166 at [17]-[20]).…
Lawrence v Carroll
[1998] NSWCA 129 Para 51

…circumstances, failure to address the issue as to why it is proper to award the difference without reduction is an error of law ( Lawrence v Carroll [1998] NSWCA 129 at 4). But in Gregory R Ball Pty Ltd v Stead (1993) 9 NSWCCR 148, where the primary judge awarded the maximum permitted by the section without referr…
Bruce v Cole
[1998] NSWCA 45 Para 29

…A finding of fact for which there is no probative evidence is an error of law ( Bruce v Cole (1998) 45 NSWLR 163 at 188-9; [1998] NSWCA 45; Haider v JP Morgan Holdings Aust Ltd t/as JP Morgan Operations Australia Ltd [2007] NSWCA 158 at [33]; Ormwave Pty Ltd v Smith [2007] NSWCA 210 at [14]). It has been said that…
Gregory R Ball Pty Ltd v Stead
[1993] NSWCA 123 Para 51

…ess the issue as to why it is proper to award the difference without reduction is an error of law ( Lawrence v Carroll [1998] NSWCA 129 at 4). But in Gregory R Ball Pty Ltd v Stead (1993) 9 NSWCCR 148, where the primary judge awarded the maximum permitted by the section without referring to the “discretion” to award an amount that bore…
Favelle Mort Ltd v Murray
[1976] HCA 13 Para 56

…959] HCA 55; Commissioner for Railways v Bain (1965) 112 CLR 246 at 272; [1965] HCA 5; and Favelle Mort Ltd v Murray (1976) 133 CLR 580 at 587; [1976] HCA 13.…
Commissioner for Railways v Bain
[1965] HCA 5 Para 56

…tevedoring and Lighterage Co Ltd v Hussey (1959) 102 CLR 482 at 496; [1959] HCA 55; Commissioner for Railways v Bain (1965) 112 CLR 246 at 272; [1965] HCA 5; and Favelle Mort Ltd v Murray (1976) 133 CLR 580 at 587; [1976] HCA 13.…
Darling Island Stevedoring and Lighterage Co Ltd v Hussey
[1959] HCA 55 Para 56

…n transient and a morbid condition of the body[1] . 1. See Darling Island Stevedoring and Lighterage Co Ltd v Hussey (1959) 102 CLR 482 at 496; [1959] HCA 55; Commissioner for Railways v Bain (1965) 112 CLR 246 at 272; [1965] HCA 5; and Favelle Mort Ltd v Murray (1976) 133 CLR 580 at 587; [1976] HCA 13.…
[1921] 2 KB 332
[1921] 2 KB 332 Para 29

…of the relative importance and significance of facts found the ultimate determination is one of fact ( Currie v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue [1921] 2 KB 332 at 336; Dennis v Watt (1942) 43 SR (NSW) 32 at 32; Tritton v Clarke [2018] NSWCCA 31 at [26]-[30]).…
Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Ltd
2002 SC13437 Para 29

…pable of supporting the inference is an error of law ( Haider v JP Morgan Holdings at [33] and cases cited; cf. Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Ltd (1985) 4 NSWLR 139 at 156 and 157). If the evidence or the facts found only admit of one conclusion, a failure to draw that conclusion raises a question of law. But whe…
Dennis v Watt
(1942) 43 SR 32 Para 29

…nce and significance of facts found the ultimate determination is one of fact ( Currie v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue [1921] 2 KB 332 at 336; Dennis v Watt (1942) 43 SR (NSW) 32 at 32; Tritton v Clarke [2018] NSWCCA 31 at [26]-[30]).…
Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd
(1987) 10 NSWLR 24 Para 28

…ion-maker did make an error of law in reaching the decision ( Wingfoot Australian Partners Pty Ltd v Kocak (2013) 252 CLR 480; [2013] HCA 43 at [55]; Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 at 274, 281-2).…
Mifsud v Campbell
(1991) 21 NSWLR 725

…69The primary judge’s duty was not only to record the evidence but also to record the findings she made based on that evidence: Mifsud v Campbell (1991) 21 NSWLR 725 at 728. While the extent of that duty may depend upon the circumstances of the individual case (ibid), where there is disputed expert evidence, the ‘part…

Legislation cited in this decision · 6

Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW)
4, 66, 67, 9 5 mentions (from Para 3)
Workers' Compensation Act 1926 (NSW)
11, 6, 9 5 mentions (from Para 3)
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW)
323, 352, 353 4 mentions (from Para 5)
District Court Act 1973 (NSW)
142G, 142N 3 mentions (from Para 1)
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
75A 2 mentions (from Para 34)
Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW)
1 mention

Medium Neutral Citation:	Whitehaven Coal Mining Limited v Pain [2018] NSWCA 229
Hearing dates:	11 July 2018
Decision date:	18 October 2018
Before:	White JA at [1]; Emmett AJA at [56]; Simpson AJA at [66]
Decision:	Appeal dismissed with costs.
Catchwords:	WORKERS COMPENSATION – Weekly and lump sum compensation – Where employee worked in coal mine – Appeal in point of law – Whether primary judge erred in awarding weekly compensation for partial incapacity the full amount of the difference between the probable weekly amount but for the injury and the average weekly amount he was able to earn – Where exercise of discretion as to proper difference was not in dispute at trial – Appeal dismissed
Legislation Cited:	District Court Act 1973 (NSW), ss 142G, 142N Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 75A Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), ss 4, 9, 66, 67, Sch 6 Workers’ Compensation Act 1926 (NSW), ss 6, 9, 11 Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW), ss 323, 352, 353
Cases Cited:	Australian Wheat Board v Pantaleo [1984] 3 NSWLR 530 Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Ltd (1985) 4 NSWLR 139 Bruce v Cole (1998) 45 NSWLR 163; [1998] NSWCA 45 Commissioner for Railways v Bain (1965) 112 CLR 246; [1965] HCA 5 Currie v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue [1921] 2 KB 332 Darling Island Stevedoring and Lighterage Co Ltd v Hussey (1959) 102 CLR 482; [1959] HCA 55 Dennis v Watt (1942) 43 SR (NSW) 32 Farrell v Metromix Pty Ltd [2001] NSWCA 166 Favelle Mort Ltd v Murray (1976) 133 CLR 580; [1976] HCA 13 Ferella v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2014] NSWCA 378; [2014] 96 ATR 875 Goodwin v Commissioner of Police [2012] NSWCA 379 Gregory R Ball Pty Ltd v Stead (1993) 9 NSWCCR 148 Haider v JP Morgan Holdings Aust Ltd t/as JP Morgan Operations Australia Ltd [2007] NSWCA 158 Hume v Walton [2005] NSWCA 148 Kesen v Luke Singer Pty Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 566 Lawrence v Carroll [1998] NSWCA 129 Mitchell v Central West Health Service (1997) 14 NSWCCR 526 Ormwave Pty Ltd v Smith [2007] NSWCA 210; [2007] 5 DDCR 180 Resource Pacific Pty Ltd v Wilkinson [2013] NSWCA 33 Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 State Super SAS Trustee Corporation v Cornes [2013] NSWCA 257 Tritton v Clarke [2018] NSWCCA 31 Tudor Capital Australia Pty Ltd v Christensen [2017] NSWCA 260 Wingfoot Australian Partners Pty Ltd v Kocak (2013) 252 CLR 480; [2013] HCA 43
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Whitehaven Coal Mining Limited (Appellant) Craig Allan Pain (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: M Joseph SC (Appellant) I D Roberts SC with D R Benson (Respondent) Solicitors: Hicksons Lawyers (Appellant) Slater & Gordon Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2017/353606
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: District Court of New South Wales Jurisdiction: Civil Citation: n/a Date of Decision: 26 October 2017 Before: Ashford ADCJ File Number(s):