Williams v Workcover Corporation of SA

In *Williams v WorkCover Corporation of SA*, the applicant, Mr Williams, sought to appeal a decision of the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) which had dismissed his application for a review of a decision made by the respondent, WorkCover Corporation of SA. The SAET had determined that Mr Williams' claim for compensation for a work injury was out of time.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the SAET had erred in law by failing to consider the applicant's argument that the respondent was estopped from relying on the time limitation provisions of the *Return to Work Act 2014* (SA). Specifically, the court had to determine if the SAET had adequately addressed the applicant's submission that WorkCover's conduct had led him to believe that his claim would be accepted, thereby preventing WorkCover from later asserting that the claim was time-barred.

The court found that the SAET had failed to properly consider the equitable doctrine of estoppel in its determination. While the SAET had acknowledged the applicant's submission regarding estoppel, it had not engaged with the substantive arguments or applied the relevant legal principles. The court reiterated that for estoppel to arise, there must be a representation or conduct by the party against whom estoppel is sought, reliance on that representation or conduct by the other party, and detriment suffered as a result of that reliance. The SAET's failure to undertake this analysis constituted an error of law.

Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the decision of the SAET, and remitted the matter back to the SAET for redetermination in accordance with the reasons of the court.