Dey v Victorian Railways Commissioners [1949] HCA 1

Dist Fol Fol a laines v Bond Cop Pian ye Lid Lag Kewileie® Ties!" stad eats ie origi Mural arbre 248 Sentry" ei aon Py Aik Sixiaees ea Foll ae 62 7" ry ana HIGH COURT ivan, es [1948-1949, ma Fa, ui" RR pate Apel Foll National Bey diem, Sy ny ig Bonny 'te "hte — AS Py Tad ane 3% mea ty, elias FHCIe ay WARS 'Many BEL Pain RAVER BAR! fete. ADD cng rkeward pean voement eee ame ad pl pl Foll icilor 1985] 1 QR fon, Py pies, oe Appl Gpaiks i Helen Neck (ios Fimding Py li of Eratis, 'Ap KBR too ez uF FoR oP ae Electronics P ihe ef Ref ws | (eka Hadss539" C oc SebBi? Babi e (A ogy ral Ine " ingineering | F Aisivala, Re Fay Ce eran, Rae, 98) Thy fuga Pry pool N 357 Cony Lad iooy 4 Ae CiibeneNa Tidy as Pccell Piromel Led ADDL ras Fgh? Foll Tuner nS Spa ae ies (93% Yaeom Sraikogonn ROS Sate Feder Re AOS ay BawchPy led brepetian Fi Esersoner Miche « JEL GS Ue Ergey os areeR APPELLANT ; 5" Brake PLarntirr, GSeyio BC. 5 18 5 Appl Dur Bi soe of atte, 'fty,, ICTORIAN RAILWAYS COMMISSIONERS . Ruspoxpvt. ACS 2 — Gorawoneeaih | DEFENDANT, Fol P29), 163 JIC Decaux Pty eetep Grow ae en gavel eS Samant (3060) ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF Pimmure 1898) 83 2000) 118 41d (1998) VICTORIA. rend

H.C. or A. Workers' Compensation—Injury by accident arising out of or in course of employ-

1948-1949. ment—Death of worker—Negligence of employer—Option of dependants to apply pi for compensation or take other proceedings—Award of compensation obtained by MELBOURNE, widow on behalf of herself and children—Effect of award as barring claim by HS) dependants under Lord Campbell's Act—Workers' Compensation Acts 1928- Oct. 25-275 1946 (No. 3806—No. 5128) (Vict.)*—Wrongs Act 1928 (No. 3807) (Vict.), sone Part III.—The 1946 Workers' Compensation Rules, rr, 8, 81.* eb. 22. Practice—Supreme Court (Vict.)—Dismissal of action—Abuse of process—Inherent ata Can —-«Jurisdiction—Rules of the Supreme Court (Vict.), Order XXV., rr. 2 4. McTiernan and . A 'Williams JJ. A worker having died in such circumstances that compensation under the Workers' Compensation Acts 1928-1946 (Vict.) was payable by the employer, Fall por the worker's widow instituted proceedings as claimant before the Workers' ai Compensation Board constituted under the Acts. She was not aware that she senate had the option referred to in s. 5 (2) (b) of the Workers' Compensation Act 1928 2, to take proceedings independently of the Act. The Board made an award Load Aborig; which was entitled in the matter of a claim for compensation made by the fants ape *The Workers' Compensation Act course of the employment is caused to bro 1928 (Vict.) provides :—By s. 3 (2): a worker his employer shall subject as DE GB 4s "Any reference to a worker who has __ hereinafter mentioned be liable to pay 'Apt «TM been injured shall where the worker is compensation in accordance with the Stee v HEM ay dead include a reference to his legal provisions of the Workers' Compensa- ath Fe iore personal representative or tohisdepen- _tion Acts. (2) Provided that . . . hath gs ies) Gants or other person to whom or for (6)... when the injury was caused Foll whose benefit compensation is pay- by the personal negligence or wilful poco able." By s. 5 (as amended): "(1) act of the employer or of some 2003) 174 If in any employment personal injury for whose act or default the employer