NSW Caselaw
District Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Phillips v Commissioner of Police [2014] NSWDC 95 Hearing dates: 10 and 11 June 2014 Decision date: 25 June 2014 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Gibson DCJ Decision: (1) The decision of the Defendant's Delegate dated 2 August 2012 pursuant to section 10B(3)(a) of the Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906 ("the Act") that the infirmity of 'osteoarthritis of the right hip', as specified in the Certificate of the Police Superannuation Advisory Committee dated 28 June 2012, was not caused by the Plaintiff being hurt on duty, be set aside, pursuant to section 21 of the Act. (2) The suffering by the Plaintiff of the infirmity of 'osteoarthritis of the right hip', as specified in the Certificate of the Police Superannuation Advisory Committee dated 28 June 2012 was caused by the Plaintiff being hurt on duty on 29 March 2011 (notional). (3) The decision of the Defendant's Delegate dated 29 November 2012 pursuant to section 12D(4)(a) of the Act, that the 'right hip injury' was not caused by the Plaintiff being hurt on duty be set aside, pursuant to section 21 of the Act. (4) The suffering by the Plaintiff of the 'right hip injury' was caused by the Plaintiff being hurt on duty. (5) The Defendant pay the Plaintiff's costs as agreed or assessed. Catchwords: WORKERS COMPENSATION - police officer - Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906 (NSW) - injury resulting in left hip replacement resulting from being hurt on duty - subsequent replacement of right hip - whether right hip deterioration resulted from being hurt on duty Legislation Cited: Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906 (NSW), ss 10B and 12D Cases Cited: Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates (1994) 35 NSWLR 452 Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles (2001) 52 NSWLR 705 Murray v Commissioner of Police (2004) 2 DDCR 31 R v Turner (1975) QB 834 Texts Cited: - Category: Principal judgment Parties: Plaintiff: Michael Scott Phillips Defendant: Commissioner of Police Representation: Plaintiff: Mr T Ower Defendant: Mr T Rowles Plaintiff: Walter Madden Jenkins Defendant: Vandervords Solicitors File Number(s): RJ00034/13 Publication restriction: None
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