Pursell v Newberry [1968] HCA 45

Pursell v Newberry [1968] HCA 45

The Commission was entitled to find on the accepted evidence that the respondent had contracted to perform the fencing and clearing work for an agreed price, that the later arrangement for the appellant to give two days' work was valuable recompense for the loan of an employee and a tractor, and that while doing that work the appellant submitted to the respondent's direction and control. The work was not merely a contribution to a joint venture, and s. 6 (5) (a) did not preclude the appellant from being an actual employee for the time being. The award of the Workers' Compensation Commission should therefore be restored.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Workers' Compensation Appeal / High Court Appeal From an Order of the Supreme Court of New South Wales Setting Aside an Award of the Workers' Compensation Commission
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs.
Legal Topics
['definition of Worker' 'contract of Service' 'master and Servant Relationship' 'boundary Fence Construction' "deeming Provisions Under Workers' Compensation Legislation"]
["workers' Compensation" 'employment Law' 'contract Law'] ['definition of Worker' 'contract of Service' 'master and Servant Relationship' 'boundary Fence Construction' "deeming Provisions Under Workers' Compensation Legislation"]

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 / High Court Appeal From an Order of the Supreme Court of New South Wales Setting Aside an Award of the Workers' Compensation Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether there was evidence on which the Workers' Compensation Commission could find that the appellant was a worker in the employ of the respondent within the meaning and operation of the Workers' Compensation Act, 1926-1964 N.S.W. at the time of injury." "Whether the appellant's two days' work on the fence was performed under a contract of service with the respondent or merely as part of a joint venture or neighbourly contribution to the boundary fence." "Whether s. 6 (5) (a) of the Workers' Compensation Act, 1926-1964 N.S.W. precluded a finding that the appellant was an actual employee of the respondent."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission was entitled to find on the accepted evidence that the respondent had contracted to perform the fencing and clearing work for an agreed price, that the later arrangement for the appellant to give two days' work was valuable recompense for the loan of an employee and a tractor, and that while doing that work the appellant submitted to the respondent's direction and control. The work was not merely a contribution to a joint venture, and s. 6 (5) (a) did not preclude the appellant from being an actual employee for the time being. The award of the Workers' Compensation Commission should therefore be restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Order of the Supreme Court of New South Wales set aside.' 'In lieu thereof order that the appeal to that Court be dismissed with costs.']