NSW Caselaw
Industrial Relations Commission New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Ainsworth v SAS Trustee Corporation (No 2) [2013] NSWIRComm 17 Hearing dates: 23/04/2012, 24/04/2012, 30/08/2012, 31/08/2012 Decision date: 14 March 2013 Before: Backman J Decision: The appeal is dismissed. Catchwords: APPEAL - s 88 Superannuation Administration Act 1996 - appellant discharged from police force on medical grounds - appellant appeals against a decision of the respondent not to amend his Certificate of Incapacity by adding specified infirmities including injuries to both knees - appeal successful at first instance - on appeal to Full Bench, Full Bench remits for determination the matter whether the appellant's knee injuries constituted a specified infirmity in accordance with the version of s 10B(1) of the PRS Act that applied as at 26 November 1997 (the time of certification) - consideration of the evidence by reference to the 1997 version of s 10B of the PRS Act as that version was construed by the Full Bench in Morley v SAS Trustee Corporation (2007) 162 IR 177 - appellant occupied the position of Patrol Commander at Dapto with the rank of Inspector at the time of his medical discharge - whether appellant incapable of discharging the duties of his office considered by reference to whether the appellant was able to delegate those duties he was incapable of discharging personally because of his physical impairments - Held: appellant was able to delegate those duties - test that appellant was incapable of discharging the duties of a Patrol Commander because of his knee injuries as at the date of his medical discharge not satisfied - appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Police Act 1990 Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906 Superannuation Administration Act 1996 Cases Cited: Ainsworth v SAS Trustee Corporation [2010] NSWIRComm 113 Morley v SAS Trustee Corporation [2006] NSWIRComm 320 Morley v SAS Trustee Corporation (2007) 162 IR 177 SAS Trustee Corporation v Ainsworth [2011] NSWIRComm 128; (2011) 213 IR 329 Category: Principal judgment Parties: David Ainsworth (Appellant) SAS Trustee Corporation (Respondent) Representation: Mr P O'Rourke, of counsel (Appellant) Mr T Ower, SC (Respondent) Oates & Smith (Appellant) SAS Trustee Corporation (Respondent) File Number(s): IRC 461 of 2009
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