Comcare v Bozicevic, Tomo & Comcare v Cauci, Sam & Comcare v Jukic, Pero [1997] FCA 288

Comcare v Bozicevic, Tomo & Comcare v Cauci, Sam & Comcare v Jukic, Pero [1997] FCA 288

Section 24(7) of the 1988 Act does not operate, via s 124(4), to deprive employees of compensation for permanent impairment less than 10% where the injury and impairment occurred before the 1988 Act; the amount payable is as if the 1971 Act still applied. Further, where such compensation is payable under s 24 (by force of s 124 and s 39 of the 1971 Act), additional compensation under s 27 for non-economic loss is also available, even though the 1971 Act made no provision for non-economic loss, as per the construction adopted by the majority in Schlenert v AOTC.

Parties
Applicant: COMCARE; Respondent: TOMO BOZICEVIC; Respondent: SAM CAUCI; Respondent: PERO JUKIC
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 April 1997
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Hearing Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Commonwealth Employees, Permanent Impairment Threshold, Transitional Provisions, Non Economic Loss, Statutory Construction
Workers' Compensation Commonwealth Employees Permanent Impairment Threshold Transitional Provisions Non Economic Loss Statutory Construction

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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

COMCARE

Applicant

TOMO BOZICEVIC

Respondent

SAM CAUCI

Respondent

PERO JUKIC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment After Hearing Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does s 24(7) of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) preclude compensation for permanent impairment of less than 10% where the impairment and injury occurred prior to the 1988 Act?
  2. 2 Are claims for additional non-economic loss under s 27 of the 1988 Act available to employees who suffered compensable impairment before commencement of the 1988 Act?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 24(7) of the 1988 Act does not operate, via s 124(4), to deprive employees of compensation for permanent impairment less than 10% where the injury and impairment occurred before the 1988 Act; the amount payable is as if the 1971 Act still applied. Further, where such compensation is payable under s 24 (by force of s 124 and s 39 of the 1971 Act), additional compensation under s 27 for non-economic loss is also available, even though the 1971 Act made no provision for non-economic loss, as per the construction adopted by the majority in Schlenert v AOTC.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the respondents' costs.