BROKEN HILL WATER BOARD v EDGECOMBE [1997] NSWCA 51
The trial judge's acceptance of Dr Bracken's opinion regarding permanent impairment, but rejection of the quantification of the pre-existing proportion, was lawful and correct. The statutory presumption of 10 percent deductible proportion under s68A(8) operated validly as there was no obligation to accept the 20 percent figure given by the expert report.
- Parties
- Appellant: Broken Hill Water Board; Respondent: Edgecombe
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 26 June 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
- Outcome
- Appeal and cross appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- Deductible Proportion, Pre Existing Condition, Statutory Presumption, Assessment of Permanent Impairment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Broken Hill Water Board
Appellant
Edgecombe
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge erred in assessing the deductible proportion for compensation regarding pre-existing back condition
- 2 Interpretation and application of s68A(8) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge's acceptance of Dr Bracken's opinion regarding permanent impairment, but rejection of the quantification of the pre-existing proportion, was lawful and correct. The statutory presumption of 10 percent deductible proportion under s68A(8) operated validly as there was no obligation to accept the 20 percent figure given by the expert report.
Court Disposition
Appeal and cross appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs.
- Cross-appeal dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment