NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION : Walsh v. Visionstream Pty. Limited [2004] NSWCA 104 HEARING DATE(S) : 16 March 2004 JUDGMENT DATE : 2 April 2004
JUDGMENT OF : Beazley JA at 1; Young CJ in Eq at 25; Barrett J at 29 DECISION : Appeal dismissed with costs
CATCHWORDS : ERROR OF LAW - Error of fact - No evidence to sustain factual finding of trial judge - Distinction between primary and ultimate findings of fact - Wrong primary finding of fact not an error of law - Section 32 of Compensation Court Act 1984 - Power of court to review decisions flawed in point of law only LEGISLATION CITED : Compensation Court Act 1984 Workers Compensation Act 1987 Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321 Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Limited (1985) 4 NSWLR 139 CASES CITED : Bruce v Cole (1998) 45 NSWLR 163 Hill v Green (1999) 48 NSWLR 161 R v District Court of the Metropolitan District Holden at Sydney: ex parte White (1966) 116 CLR 644 Waterford v The Commonwealth (1987) 163 CLR 54 PARTIES : Martin Walsh (Appellant) Visionstream Pty. Limited (Respondent) FILE NUMBER(S) : CA 41232/02 COUNSEL : R. Goodridge (Appellant) H. Shore SC (Respondent) SOLICITORS : Firths - The Compensation Lawyers (Appellant) Bartier Perry
LOWER COURT Compensation Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT WC51212/01 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Burke ACCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER :
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL CA 41232/02 WC 51212/01
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