Yamma Pty Ltd v Reid

WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION

DETERMINATION OF APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BY AN ARBITRATOR

CITATION:Yamma Pty Limited v Reid [2006] NSWWCCPD 344

APPELLANT: Yamma Pty Limited

RESPONDENT: Anna Maria Reid

INSURER:Employers Mutual Indemnity (Workers Compensation) Limited
FILE NUMBER:  WCC16386-05
DATE OF ARBITRATOR’S DECISION:          27 February 2006
DATE OF APPEAL DECISION:  15 December 2006
SUBJECT MATTER OF DECISION: Serious and wilful misconduct; ‘under the influence of alcohol’; interruption to a journey and ‘the risk of injury’ within the meaning of section 10 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987; adequacy of reasons; findings of incapacity and weight of evidence; failure to apply the ‘five steps’ in Mitchell; adequacy of evidence in respect of section 60 award.
PRESIDENTIAL MEMBER:  Acting Deputy President Deborah Moore
HEARING:On the papers
REPRESENTATION:  Appellant:      Dutton Lawyers
Respondent:    Paul Keady & Associates

ORDERS MADE ON APPEAL: A. The decision of the Arbitrator dated 27 February 2006 is revoked and the following decision made in its place:
1. That the Respondent (Yamma Pty
Limited) pay the Applicant (Anna Maria Reid) weekly compensation at the rate of $494.36 for the period 25/6/03 to 8/9/03 under s.36 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.

2.That the Respondent pay the Applicant weekly compensation at the rate of $103.16 for the period 9/9/03 to 26/10/04 and from 5/11/04 to 10/1/06 under s.40 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.

3.That the Respondent pay the Applicant weekly compensation at the rate of $60.00 per week from 11/1/06 to date and continuing under s.40 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.

4.That the Respondent pay the Applicant’s section 60 expenses pursuant to the provisions of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 on production of accounts or receipts.

5.That the Respondent pay the Applicant’s costs as agreed or assessed

B.Yamma Pty Limited is to pay the costs of the appeal.

FOR ALL INFORMATION, REASONS, FINDINGS AND THE DETERMINATION OF THIS APPEAL SEE:

Reid v Yamma Pty Limited [2006] NSWWCCPD 343

DECISION:

The appeal is not successful for the reasons set out in Reid v Yamma Pty Limited [2006] NSWWCCPD 343.

COSTS:

Yamma Pty Limited is to pay the costs of this appeal.

Deborah Moore
Acting Deputy President
15 December 2006

I CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND ACCURATE RECORD OF THE REASONS FOR DECISION OF DEBORAH MOORE, ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION.

ASSOCIATE

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Yamma Pty Ltd v Reid is a workers' compensation case that arose from an appeal against a decision of the Workers Compensation Commission. The appellant, Yamma Pty Ltd, sought to challenge a decision that found Anna Maria Reid, the respondent, was entitled to weekly compensation payments. The appeal was heard by Acting Deputy President Deborah Moore on the papers, with both parties represented by counsel. The case involved a number of legal issues, including whether Reid had engaged in serious and wilful misconduct, whether she was under the influence of alcohol, and whether she had interrupted a journey in a manner that created a risk of injury. The case also involved issues of the adequacy of reasons, the weight of evidence, and the application of the 'five steps' in Mitchell.

Acting Deputy President Deborah Moore found that the appeal was not successful. The court held that Reid was entitled to weekly compensation payments from Yamma Pty Ltd, as well as payment of her section 60 expenses. The court found that the Arbitrator's decision was supported by the evidence and that Yamma Pty Ltd had failed to establish that Reid had engaged in serious and wilful misconduct. The court also found that the Arbitrator had adequately considered the evidence and applied the correct legal principles in making his decision. As a result, the appeal was dismissed and Yamma Pty Ltd was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.

In summary, Yamma Pty Ltd v Reid is a workers' compensation case that involved a number of complex legal issues. The court found that the Arbitrator's decision was supported by the evidence and that Yamma Pty Ltd had failed to establish that Reid had engaged in serious and wilful misconduct. The appeal was dismissed and Yamma Pty Ltd was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established