Woolworths Limited v Kassem

Woolworths Limited, the appellant employer, challenged an arbitrator's decision in the context of a workers' compensation claim made by Kassem, the respondent worker. The dispute revolved around the admissibility of certain evidence, specifically the return to work co-ordinator’s case notes, which the arbitrator had considered in reaching his decision. The matter was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT).

The primary legal issue before the tribunal was whether the arbitrator was correct in admitting and relying on the return to work co-ordinator’s case notes, which Woolworths argued were inadmissible as they did not comply with the rules of evidence. Woolworths contended that the notes were hearsay and speculative, and thus should not have been considered. The tribunal had to determine the extent to which the arbitrator was bound by the rules of evidence under section 354(2) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998.

The tribunal found that under the statutory framework, the arbitrator was not strictly bound by the common law rules of evidence. The tribunal emphasised that the arbitrator was empowered to consider all relevant evidence in making a determination. It was held that the return to work co-ordinator’s case notes were relevant and could be considered in the context of the overall evidence presented. The tribunal confirmed the arbitrator's decision, finding that the notes were properly admitted and that their consideration did not lead to an unjust outcome.

The tribunal confirmed the Arbitrator's determination of 17 March 2010 and ordered that the employer pay the worker’s costs of the appeal, as agreed or assessed.