Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
John Holland Pty Ltd v Bartlett [2023] FCA 1030 File number(s): SAD 100 of 2022
Judgment of: O'SULLIVAN J
Date of judgment: 29 August 2023
Catchwords: WORKERS COMPENSATION – appeal from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where the Tribunal determined that the respondent was entitled to payment of compensation calculated under s 19 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (SRC Act) – process of making a claim for compensation under the SRC Act – statutory construction of s 54 of the SRC Act – whether an employee is to provide a medical certificate and claim form each time payment of compensation is sought under s 19 of the SRC Act – whether the Tribunal failed to make findings with respect to whether the respondent had an incapacity to engage in work at the same level – where the Tribunal took into account an irrelevant consideration and made an error of law – where the Tribunal failed to provide adequate reasons – matter remitted to the Tribunal to be determined according to law – appeal allowed
Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), ss 43(2) & (2B) Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth), ss 4, 4(8)-(9), 5, 5A, 14, 16, 19, 19(1) & (2)-(14), 20, 21, 21A, 22, 24, 29, 29A, 42C, 53, 54, 54(1), (2) & (5), 55(a), (b) & (c), 57, 57(1)-(2), 58, 69(a), 72(a), 108, 108A & C
Cases cited: Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue (Northern Territory) [2009] HCA 41; (2009) 239 CLR 27 Australian Conservation Foundation Inc v Forestry Commission of Tasmania (1988) 19 FCR 127 Australian Postal Corporation v Oudyn [2003] FCA 318 Brennan v Comcare (1994) 50 FCR 555 Canute v Comcare [2006] HCA 47; (2006) 226 CLR 535 Comcare Australia v Rowe [2002] FCA 1034 Comcare v Lofts [2013] FCA 1197; (2013) 217 FCR 220 Comcare v ZZRP [2019] FCA 952 Craig v The State of South Australia [1995] HCA 58, (1995) 184 CLR 163 Gye v McIntyre [1991] HCA 60; (1991) 171 CLR 609 Haritos v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [2015] FCAFC 92; (2015) 233 FCR 315 Hossain v Minister for Immigration [2018] HCA 34, (2018) 264 CLR 123 Lees v Comcare [1999] FCA 753; (1999) 29 AAR 350 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZMTA & Anor [2019] HCA 3 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf [2001] HCA 30; (2001) 206 CLR 323 Prain v Comcare [2017] FCAFC 143; (2017) 256 FCR 65 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28; (1998) 194 CLR 355 Repatriation Commission v Hawkins (1993) 45 FCR 205 SZTAL v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] HCA 34; (2017) 262 CLR 362 Telstra Corporation Ltd v Kotevski (2013) 209 FCR 558; [2013] FCA 27 Vetter v Lake Macquarie City Council (2001) 202 CLR 439; [2001] HCA 12 Woodhouse v Comcare [2021] FCAFC 95; (2021) 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