Excell v Comcare [2008] FCA 757

Excell v Comcare [2008] FCA 757

The Tribunal found as a matter of fact, on ample evidence, that the applicant's psychological condition was well entrenched before 1 December 1988, had resulted in substantial impairment before that date, and had not undergone any post-commencement change amounting to a new or increased permanent impairment. Although the notice of appeal stated a question of law, answering that question did not assist the applicant because the decisive finding was factual. The Federal Court had no jurisdiction under s 44 to disturb that factual finding, so s 124(3) excluded lump sum compensation under s 24 and the appeal was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal Under S 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) / Federal Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['permanent Impairment' 'psychological Condition' 'post Traumatic Stress Disorder' 'transitional Provisions' 'question of Law' 'commonwealth Employee Compensation']
["workers' Compensation" 'administrative Law'] ['permanent Impairment' 'psychological Condition' 'post Traumatic Stress Disorder' 'transitional Provisions' 'question of Law' 'commonwealth Employee Compensation']

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

Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal Under S 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) / Federal Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's permanent impairment by reason of her psychological condition had become permanent prior to 1 December 1988, the commencement date of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth)." 'Whether s 124(3) of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) excluded entitlement to lump sum compensation under s 24.' 'Whether the appeal raised and depended upon a question of law rather than findings of fact.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found as a matter of fact, on ample evidence, that the applicant's psychological condition was well entrenched before 1 December 1988, had resulted in substantial impairment before that date, and had not undergone any post-commencement change amounting to a new or increased permanent impairment. Although the notice of appeal stated a question of law, answering that question did not assist the applicant because the decisive finding was factual. The Federal Court had no jurisdiction under s 44 to disturb that factual finding, so s 124(3) excluded lump sum compensation under s 24 and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed with costs.']