Comcare Australia v Pires [2005] FCA 747

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Comcare Australia v Pires [2005] FCA 747

COMPENSATION – Appeal from Administrative Appeals Tribunal - meaning of s 8(1) of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) – whether overtime to be included in calculation of normal weekly earnings Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) – s 8 Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) – s15 Bortolazzo v Comcare (1997) 75 FCR 385 referred to Bull v Attorney-General (NSW) (1913) 17 CLR 370 referred to CIC Insurance Limited v Bankstown Football Club Limited (1997) 187 CLR 384 referred to Hoffman v Chief of Army [2004] FCAFC 148 referred to Isherwood v Butler Pollnow Pty Limited (1986) 6 NSWLR 363 referred to IW v City of Perth (1997) 191 CLR 1 referred to Network Ten Pty Limited v TCN Channel Nine Pty Limited (2004) 205 ALR 1 referred to Newcastle City Council v GIO General Limited referred to Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355 referred to R v Young (1999) 46 NSWLR 681 referred to Re Bolton; Ex parte Beane (1987) 162 CLR 514 referred to Re Zarb and Comcare (1997) 48 ALD 718 not followed Refrigerated Express Lines (Australasia) Pty Limited v Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation (No 2) (1980) 29 ALR 333 referred to Rieson v SST Consulting Services Pty Limited [2005] FCAFC 6 referred to Pearce and Geddes, Statutory Interpretation in Australia, 5th Ed, Butterworths, Sydney, 2001 COMCARE AUSTRALIA v VIRATO PIRES NSD 1880 of 2004 JACOBSON J 9 JUNE 2005 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1880 of 2004

On appeal from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal

BETWEEN: COMCARE AUSTRALIA

APPELLANT

AND: VIRIATO PIRES

RESPONDENT

JUDGES: JACOBSON J

DATE OF ORDER: 9 JUNE 2005