BORAL SGB PTY LTD v WHITE [1996] NSWCA 55

BORAL SGB PTY LTD v WHITE [1996] NSWCA 55

The appeal was dismissed because the evidence justified the finding that the respondent's detour to collect wages at Belmore and subsequent activities materially increased the risk of injury during the journey for reasons connected with employment within s10(1C), and the respondent's fault did not preclude an entitlement to compensation.

Parties
Appellant: Boral SGB Pty Ltd; Respondent: White
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Compensation Court of NSW Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Journey Claims, Material Increase in Risk, Connection With Employment, Fault and Contributory Negligence

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Boral SGB Pty Ltd

Appellant

White

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Compensation Court of NSW Decision

  1. 1 Whether s10(1C) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 applied where injury was partly due to fault of the worker
  2. 2 Whether there was a material increase in risk of injury on a periodic journey for reasons connected with employment
  3. 3 Whether respondent's banking activities could be treated as 'for a reason connected with employment' under s10(1C)

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the evidence justified the finding that the respondent's detour to collect wages at Belmore and subsequent activities materially increased the risk of injury during the journey for reasons connected with employment within s10(1C), and the respondent's fault did not preclude an entitlement to compensation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.