Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Comcare v Prater [2014] FCA 895 Citation: Comcare v Prater [2014] FCA 895
Appeal from: Prater v Comcare [2014] AATA 7
Parties: COMCARE v LYNETTE PRATER
File number(s): ACD 7 of 2014
Judge(s): BENNETT J
Date of judgment: 22 August 2014
Catchwords: WORKERS' COMPENSATION – appeal on a question of law from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether the Tribunal failed to state and apply the correct standard of proof or ask the correct questions – whether the Tribunal failed to consider or have regard to a submission of substance or a submission that would have affected the outcome
Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 43(2B) Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) ss 5A(1), 14, 53
Cases cited: Australian Postal Corporation v Hughes [2009] FCA 1057 Australian Postal Corporation v Sellick (2008) 101 ALDF 245
Date of hearing: 25 July 2014
Place: Canberra
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 45
Counsel for the Applicant: Ms D Dinnen
Solicitor for the Applicant: Sparke Helmore Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr I Bradfield
Solicitor for the Respondent: Blumers Lawyers
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION ACD 7 of 2014
ON APPEAL FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL
BETWEEN: COMCARE
Applicant
AND: LYNETTE PRATER
Respondent
JUDGE: BENNETT J DATE OF ORDER: 22 AUGUST 2014 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
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