THE COMMISSIONER FOR RAILWAYS V. WATERS

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Judgment delivered at___SYDNEY

WM Houston, Govt, Print, Mab,

THE COMMISSIONER FOR RAILWAYS

Ve

WATERS

ORDER

Appeal allowed. Order of the Supreme Court of New South Wales set aside. In lieu thereof, order that the questions in the Case stated to that court be answered that on the material in the said Case stated it was not open to the Workers' Compensation Commission to find, or to make an award on the footing, that William James Waters deceased in the said Case mentioned died from injury arising in the course of his employment by the Commissioner for Railways.

Order that the respondent pay the appellant's costs in the Supreme Court and in this Court.

THE COMMISSIONER FOR RAILWAYS (N.S.We)

Ve WATERS ZUDGMENT, TLO "AYL MENZIES J.

WINDE: Js

z 0} Hv

This is an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Full Court) by which answers were given to two questions contained in a case stated to that court by the Workers' Compensation Commission of New South Wales (Judge Rainbow) under the provisions of s. 37(4) of the Workers! Compensation Act, 1926-1958 (N.S.W.).

The section authorizes the Commission (and requires it, if requested by a party), when any question of law arises in any proceeding before it, to state a case for the decision of the Supreme Court thereon, and to do so notwithstanding that an award has been made by the Commission. The decision of the court is to be binding upon the Commission and upon all the parties to the proceeding: subs. (7). There is thus provided a means for submitting the Commission's determination to the Supreme Court for review within the limits of the questions of law raised, and the valid operation of the award as a determination of the proceedings before the Commission depends upon the answers which the court gives to those questions: Smith Ve -Mann (1932) 47 CeLeR. 426, at p. 4h6. This is the only form of appeal or challenge which the Act permits: s. 3701) (2)(3). The procedure has its disadvantages, and wiless sufficient care is taken to ensure that a case is so stated as to bring out clearly what questions of law have arisen, and to set out all the facts, both primary and ultimate, which have been found by the Commission and are material to the questions, not only is the task of the Supreme Court and of this Court on appeal made unnecessarily difficult, but excessive delay and expense to the parties is