Goward v Commonwealth [1957] HCA 60

Goward v Commonwealth [1957] HCA 60

Special leave was refused because an appeal would fail. Although living in the camp could be regarded as an incident of the deceased's employment, there was no evidence explaining why he was on the railway line or where he was going. The proximity of the camp to the railway and the public crossing were only antecedent conditions and did not establish that the railway risk was an operative risk of the employment. No duty required the deceased to cross the line, and any risk from using the public crossing or passing through the fence was not shown to be specifically associated with his employment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Application for Special Leave to Appeal / High Court Application for Special Leave From an Order of a Stipendiary Magistrate Dismissing an Appeal From the Commonwealth Commissioner for Employees' Compensation
Outcome
Application for special leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['death by Accident' 'arising Out of Employment' 'commonwealth Employee Compensation' 'special Leave to Appeal' 'state Courts Exercising Federal Jurisdiction']
["workers' Compensation" 'federal Jurisdiction' 'appeals'] ['death by Accident' 'arising Out of Employment' 'commonwealth Employee Compensation' 'special Leave to Appeal' 'state Courts Exercising Federal Jurisdiction']

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

Application for Special Leave to Appeal / High Court Application for Special Leave From an Order of a Stipendiary Magistrate Dismissing an Appeal From the Commonwealth Commissioner for Employees' Compensation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether special leave to appeal should be granted from the magistrate's order dismissing the applicant's appeal against refusal of compensation." "Whether the deceased employee's fatal accident arose out of his employment within s. 9(1) of the Commonwealth Employees' Compensation Act 1930-1954." "Whether the location of the camp near the railway and use of the crossing made the railway risk an incident of the deceased's employment." "Whether s. 39(2) of the Judiciary Act 1903-1955 applied to proceedings under s. 20 of the Commonwealth Employees' Compensation Act 1930-1954."]

Ratio Decidendi

Special leave was refused because an appeal would fail. Although living in the camp could be regarded as an incident of the deceased's employment, there was no evidence explaining why he was on the railway line or where he was going. The proximity of the camp to the railway and the public crossing were only antecedent conditions and did not establish that the railway risk was an operative risk of the employment. No duty required the deceased to cross the line, and any risk from using the public crossing or passing through the fence was not shown to be specifically associated with his employment.

Court Disposition

Application for special leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Application for special leave to appeal refused.']