Murray v Shillingsworth [2006] NSWCA 367

New South Wales Court of Appeal

CITATION: Murray v Shillingsworth [2006] NSWCA 367

HEARING DATE(S): 15/11/06

JUDGMENT DATE: 20 December 2006

JUDGMENT OF: Hodgson JA at 1; Santow JA at 9; Einstein J at 11

DECISION: 1. Appeal dismissed; 2. Appellant to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal

CATCHWORDS: Workers Compensation Act 1987, s9(A) - Whether employment a substantial contributing factor to injury - Whether error of law in process where trial judge preferred one expert over the other - Proper approach where Court faced with competing hypotheses as to cause of an injury - Capacity of a trial judge to draw inferences which depend at least in part on intuition - Adequacy of trial judge's reasons - Consideration of interplay between the requirement of "contributing factor" in s 4(b)(ii) and "substantial contributing factor" in s 9(A) of Workers Compensation Act 1987

LEGISLATION CITED: District Court Act 1973 Workers Compensation Act 1987

Adelaide Stevedoring Co Ltd v Forst (1940) 64 CLR 538 Ambulance Service New South Wales v. Daniel (2000) 19 NSWCCR 697 Azzopardi v. Tasman UEB Industries Ltd (1985) 4 NSWLR 139 Commonwealth v Amann Aviation Pty Ltd (1991) 174 CLR 64 EMI (Australia) Ltd v Bes (1970) WCR 114 Fink v Fink (1946) 74 CLR 127 G v. H (1994) 181 CLR 387 CASES CITED: Hevi Lift (PNG) Ltd v Etherington [2005] NSWCA 42 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 Liverpool/Fairfield Disabled Persons Resource Service Inc v. Liew [2002] NSWCA 31 Mercer v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2000] NSWCA 138 Pickwell v. Cotswold Australia Pty Ltd (2001) 22 NSWCCR 654 Raines v. Bayebb Pty Ltd (2002) 23 NSWCCR 687 Seltsam Pty Ltd v. McGuiness [2000] NSWCA 29 WorkCover Authority of New South Wales v Walsh [2004] NSWCA 186