Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Hickey v Australian Postal Corporation [2023] FCA 57 Appeal from: Hickey and Australian Postal Corporation (Compensation) [2021] AATA 1521
File number(s): NSD 580 of 2021
Judgment of: BURLEY J
Date of judgment: 8 February 2023
Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – appeal from decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal affirming determination by the respondent that it has no present liability to continue paying the applicant compensation for back injury sustained at work in 1993 – whether Tribunal provided adequate reasons for its decision – whether Tribunal applied the wrong standard of proof when deciding whether the applicant sustained a certain injury and continues to experience symptoms – whether Tribunal applied the wrong test when determining whether the injury sustained in 1993 caused his incapacity for work and need for medical treatment – appeal dismissed
Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) ss 43, 44 Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) ss 5A, 5B, 14, 16, 19, 62
Cases cited: Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd v Wraith [1983] FCA 187; 48 ALR 500 Corporation of the City of Enfield v Development Assessment Commission [2000] HCA 5; 199 CLR 135 Cross and Comcare [2018] AATA 52 Hickey and Australian Postal Corporation (Compensation) [2021] AATA 1521 Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission v May [2016] HCA 19; 257 CLR 468 Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs v Pochi [1980] FCA 85; 31 ALR 666 Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang [1996] HCA 6; 185 CLR 259 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf [2001] HCA 30; 206 CLR 323 Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 247 Tarrant v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2015] FCAFC 8; 317 ALR 328 Tudor Capital Australia Pty Ltd v Christensen [2017] NSWCA 260 V324 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 259 Wingfoot Australia Pertners Pty Ltd v Kocak [2013] HCA 43; 252 CLR 480 Wonson v Comcare [2020] FCAFC 76; 276 FCR 613 Woodhouse v Comcare [2021] FCAFC 95; 285 FCR 14
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