CAWSEY V. THE SUPERANNUATION BOARD 15/1935

080,

AL J, Gurew, Gorormment Printer, Melbourne.

CecrkK LEA ES GES (F

\ A IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT.

OR Ale Lee Be da the

Judgment delivered at,

CAWSEY ve THE SUPSRANNUATION BOARD. JUDGMENT STARKE J.

In my opinion, the provisions of Sec. 60N of the Superannuation Act 1922-30 are subject to the provisions of Sec. 600. And, in the opin- ion of the Superannuation Board, the extent of the injury to which this appellant is subjected is only fifteen per centum of total incapacity in relation to civil employment. The medical evidence which has been given can: assign no physical reason for the pain the appellant says he is suf ~ fering, or for his inability to do hard work, which he says he is unable to do. In the face of the evidence, I am umable to say that he is suffer- ing from injury of a greater degree than the Board has decided, and in those circumstances I must dismiss the appeal.

I would point out that under Sec. 600 (2)(a), if the cause of the incapacity and pain which the appellant says he is suffering,becomes more apparent and less obscure than it is, I should think the Board could re- consider the matter and redetermine $#e his pension. But that would not be possible if he accepts a lump sum, as he is entitled to do under subs section (fed sec. 600. It would be better, I should think, if he took the pension awarded to him, in the hope that the passing of time may make his inability and incapacity more clearly manifest than at present.

The appeal is dismissed. There will be no costs.