Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Inco Ships Pty Ltd v Finlay Murdoch Hardman [2007] FCA 1138
SEAFARERS COMPENSATION – Appeal from Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether employee entitled to compensation for injury under Seafarers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1992 (Cth) (the Seafarers Act) – whether Certificate of Medical Fitness invalid when procured by misleading information – whether invalid Certificate of Medical Fitness means employee not a "seafarer" under s 3 of the Seafarers Act – whether content of notice given under s 63 of the Seafarers Act limits claim for compensation – whether aggravation of pre-existing degenerative condition – whether aggravation caused incapacity for work – whether incapacity materially contributed to by employment – whether employee made wilful and false representation about pre-existing disease – whether injury cause by serious and wilful misconduct WORKERS COMPENSATION – see above ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Appeal from Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether issues can be raised for the first time on appeal – whether Tribunal erred in not addressing certain questions not raised at hearing Seafarers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1992 (Cth) ss 3, 10(7), 26(1), 26(3), 63 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 44(7) Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) Navigation Act 1912 (Cth) Migration Act 1958 (Cth) Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 (UK) Workers Compensation Act 1971 (SA) WorkCover Queensland Act 1996 (Qld) Comcare v Fiedler (2001) 115 FCR 328 considered Coulton v Holcombe (1986) 162 CLR 1 cited University of Wollongong v Metwally (No 2) (1985) 59 ALJR 481 cited Australian Meat Holdings Pty Ltd v Kazi [2004] 2 Qd R 458 considered WorkCover Corporation (San Remo Macaroni Co Pty Ltd) v Da Ping (1994) 175 LSJS 469 cited Yango Pastoral Co Pty Limited v First Chicago Australia Limited (1978) 139 CLR 410 applied Visscher v Munro (2005) 147 FCR 538 cited Nonferral (NSW) Pty Ltd v Taufia (1998) 43 NSWLR 312 cited Lees v Comcare (1999) 56 ALD 84 cited Zickar v MGH Plastic Industries Pty Limited (1995-1996) 187 CLR 310 cited Kennedy Cleaning Services Pty Limited v Petkoska (2000) 200 CLR 286 cited Commonwealth v Beattie (1981) 53 FLR 191 cited Federal Broom Company Pty Limited v Semlitch (1964) 110 CLR 626 cited Re Schofield and Comcare (1995) 38 ALD 124 cited Johnson v Marshall Sons & Co Ltd [1906] AC 409 cited Ismakovich v Broken Hill Pty Company Limited (1982) 49(2) SAIR 209 applied Comcare v Calipari[2001] FCA 1534 cited Richards v Faulls Pty Ltd [1971] WAR 129 cited Hills v Brambles Holdings Ltd (1987) 4 ANZ Ins Cas 60-785 discussed INCO SHIPS PTY LTD v FINLAY MURDOCH HARDMAN NSD 1242 OF 2006
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate