RJ Brodie (Holdings) Pty Ltd v Pennell [1968] HCA 73

RJ Brodie (Holdings) Pty Ltd v Pennell [1968] HCA 73

A partially incapacitated worker is not excluded from s. 11 (2) merely because he earns some money after the employer has failed to provide suitable employment. The respondent's minor business activities and profit did not provide a real basis for finding that he was not ready, willing and able to enter suitable employment with the appellant, and there was no basis for remitting the matter. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Workers' Compensation Appeal / Appeal to the High Court of Australia by Special Leave From an Order of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales on a Case Stated by the Workers' Compensation Commission
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['partial Incapacity' 'suitable Employment' 'notional Total Incapacity' "employer's Failure to Provide Employment" 'post Injury Earnings']
["workers' Compensation" 'employment Law' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['partial Incapacity' 'suitable Employment' 'notional Total Incapacity' "employer's Failure to Provide Employment" 'post Injury Earnings']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Workers' Compensation Appeal / Appeal to the High Court of Australia by Special Leave From an Order of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales on a Case Stated by the Workers' Compensation Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether s. 11 (2) of the Workers' Compensation Act, 1926-1964 N.S.W. was inapplicable because the partially incapacitated worker earned some money after the employer failed to provide suitable employment." "Whether the matter should be remitted to the Workers' Compensation Commission to determine whether the respondent was ready, willing and able to enter suitable employment with the appellant after 9th December 1964."]

Ratio Decidendi

A partially incapacitated worker is not excluded from s. 11 (2) merely because he earns some money after the employer has failed to provide suitable employment. The respondent's minor business activities and profit did not provide a real basis for finding that he was not ready, willing and able to enter suitable employment with the appellant, and there was no basis for remitting the matter. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']