GYLDENLOVE v SECCOMBE [1989] NSWCA 93

GYLDENLOVE v SECCOMBE [1989] NSWCA 93

It was a question of fact for the trial judge to determine whether the deceased was regularly carrying on a business in his own name, and the findings on this matter are not open to review by the Court of Appeal unless they are unreasonable. No question of law arose for determination by the Court.

Parties
Appellant: Gyldenlove; Respondent: Seccombe
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 1989
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Contractor Deemed as Worker, Construction of S6(3 A) Workers Compensation Act, Fact Vs Law in Employment Contracts
Workers Compensation Contractor Deemed as Worker Construction of S6(3 A) Workers Compensation Act Fact Vs Law in Employment Contracts

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gyldenlove

Appellant

Seccombe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the requirements in the parenthesis of s6(3A) of the Workers Compensation Act were satisfied
  2. 2 Whether the issue under s6(3A) is a question of fact or law

Ratio Decidendi

It was a question of fact for the trial judge to determine whether the deceased was regularly carrying on a business in his own name, and the findings on this matter are not open to review by the Court of Appeal unless they are unreasonable. No question of law arose for determination by the Court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.