THE WORKCOVER AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES v ANGELUCCI and ORS SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL PRIESTLEY and SHELLER JJA 24 November 1997 [1997] NSWCA 350 Priestley JA The Court is of the view leave should not be granted on this summons. The question involved is one of construction primarily of s175(4) and 8277 of the Workers Compensation Act. The contention of the claimant is that the word "employer" in s175(4) should be read broadly in a way to be filled out by considerations emanating from s277. It is the Court's view that substantially for the reasons given by Finnane AJ the word "employer" cannot be read in s175(4) to include a director by reason of s277. The point appears to the Court to be of sufficient clarity, that is, the construction adopted by Finnane AJ seems to the Court to be sufficiently clear as to have justified him in striking out the statement of claim within the rules commonly described by reference to the General Steel case. The Court is, therefore, of the view that the summons should be dismissed with cost.