Herbert v Workers Compensation Commission [2016] NSWCATAD 28

Herbert v Workers Compensation Commission [2016] NSWCATAD 28

The Tribunal had no jurisdiction because no statute conferred power on it to review the identified decisions made under the workers compensation legislation, and the applicant's allegations did not amount to a consumer claim within the Tribunal's consumer jurisdiction. The applicant was not shown to be a consumer in relation to the respondent, and s 233 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 contradicted the premise that an employer could take money from a worker for workers compensation liability.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 2016
Procedural Posture
External Appeal/application Seeking Review of Decisions of the NSW Workers Compensation Commission / Decision on the Papers; Jurisdiction Ruling
Outcome
The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to review any of the decisions the applicant identified.
Legal Topics
['jurisdiction of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal' 'review of Workers Compensation Commission Decisions' 'consumer Claim Jurisdiction' 'procedural Fairness Allegations' 'referral of Question of Law to the Supreme Court']
['administrative Law' 'workers Compensation' 'consumer Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['jurisdiction of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal' 'review of Workers Compensation Commission Decisions' 'consumer Claim Jurisdiction' 'procedural Fairness Allegations' 'referral of Question of Law to the Supreme Court']

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

External Appeal/application Seeking Review of Decisions of the NSW Workers Compensation Commission / Decision on the Papers; Jurisdiction Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Civil and Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to review decisions made by officers of the NSW Workers Compensation Commission in relation to the applicant's workers compensation claim." "Whether the applicant's asserted contribution to workers compensation insurance made her a consumer with a consumer claim within the Tribunal's jurisdiction." 'Whether a question of law should be referred to the NSW Supreme Court under s 54 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal had no jurisdiction because no statute conferred power on it to review the identified decisions made under the workers compensation legislation, and the applicant's allegations did not amount to a consumer claim within the Tribunal's consumer jurisdiction. The applicant was not shown to be a consumer in relation to the respondent, and s 233 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 contradicted the premise that an employer could take money from a worker for workers compensation liability.

Court Disposition

The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to review any of the decisions the applicant identified.

Orders

  • ['The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to review any of the decisions the applicant identified.']