NSW Caselaw
SMITH v JAQUES CULLEN PTY LIMITED
SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
KirBy P, Hope and SAMUELS JJA 27 April 1988
[1988] NSWCA 137
WORKERS' COMPENSATION — boilermakers' deafness — award of compensation in 1971 based on Medical Board report — later claim in 1980 — claim dismissed — judge holds no nexus established between deterioration in hearing and employment — whether decision involves going behind earlier award and findings inherent in it — whether issue estoppel precludes finding — case stated to Court of Appeal — held: (Hope JA; Kirby P and Samuels JA concurring) (1) Judge not precluded from finding of fact that no relevant nexus to employment of deterioration in hearing; (2) No issue estoppel precludes finding; (3) Case stated answered accordingly. The Electricity Commission of New South Wales v Benham, unreported, CA, 26 October 1981 distinguished.
EVIDENCE — issue estoppel — earlier award of Workers' Compensation Commission — later claim for alleged deterioration of hearing of worker — employer challenges connexion with employment — whether such challenge precluded by issue estoppel — held: Not so precluded. Workers' Compensation Act 1926, s16(1A), s16(5A).
ORDERS
1. Case stated answered: (a) No. (b) Does not arise.
2. Claimant to pay opponent's costs.
Hope JA This is an appeal by way of a stated case from an award made by his Honour Judge McGrath in favour of the respondent in a case where the applicant worker was seeking compensation pursuant to the provisions of s16(1A) of the Workers Compensation Act 1926 in respect of what he claimed to be a diminution in his hearing due to what is commonly called boilermaker's deafness.
The history of the matter may be shortly stated. The worker was at all times employed in a business in parts of which there was such noise as could cause persons working there to suffer the condition of boilermaker's deafness. The worker suffered a degree of deafness and in 1970 made an application to the Workers' Compensation Commission against the employer claiming compensation for that deafness.
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