CROUCH v WYONG SHIRE COUNCIL [1996] NSWCA 131

CROUCH v WYONG SHIRE COUNCIL

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES — COURT OF APPEAL

CLARKE JA, COLE JA and HUNTER AJA 4 March 1996 [1996] NSWCA 131

The appellant appealed from a decision of O'Toole CCJ in the Compensation Court rejecting his claim for lump sum benefits under the Worker's Compensation Act 1987 for a back injury suffered in 1988. The appellant submitted that not only did her Honour fail to disclose her reasoning process, but that, in the course of setting out events which occurred during the course of the trial, she made a significant mistake regarding a concession purported to have been made by the appellant in cross-examination, which apparent concession was not supported by the transcript of evidence. The Court allowed the appeal.

Held:

(1) It is necessary that the essential ground or grounds upon which a decision rests should be articulated. In many cases the reasons for preferring one conclusion to another also need to be given. These reasons should be sufficient to enable the parties to know the broad course of the trial judge's reasoning in leading to a conclusion: Soulemezis v Dudley (Holdings) Limited (1987) 10 NSWLR 247.

(2) Where the judgment clearly demonstrates that the trial judge has understood the evidence properly and has exposed the reasons which led them to prefer one version of the evidence to another, earlier mistakes may be regarded as irrelevant. Where, however, the reasoning process is meagre, mistakes will compound the inadequacy of that reasoning process.

Clarke JA. The appellant was born in 1936. He worked as an apprentice cabinet maker and then spent 16 and a half years as mess supervisor in the army. After discharge from that employment he had a number of jobs and, in 1978, he commenced employment with the respondent as a labourer. After nine months he reached the position of leading hand in a road construction gang.