Luya Julius Pty Ltd v Shepherd [1955] HCA 47

Luya Julius Pty Ltd v Shepherd [1955] HCA 47

Farmer & Co. Ltd. v. Griffiths and Cain v. Malone rested on a supposed incapacity of an infant to give a binding receipt for workers' compensation. That reasoning did not apply under the Queensland Act because cl. 20 expressly made the receipt of a person under twenty-one a good and valid discharge in law and allowed such a person to agree on compensation with the Insurance Commissioner. The respondent therefore had capacity to recover compensation within cl. 24, and his receipt of compensation carried the statutory consequences under s. 9 and cl. 24, precluding his damages action against the appellants.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Concerning Personal Injury Damages and Workers' Compensation / Appeal From a Judgment of the Supreme Court of Queensland
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs.
Legal Topics
['recovery of Compensation and Common Law Damages' "infant Worker's Receipt of Compensation" 'third Party Liability for Workplace Related Injury' "effect of Cl. 20 and Cl. 24 of the Schedule to the Workers' Compensation Acts 1916 to 1952 Q."]
["workers' Compensation" 'tort Law' 'personal Injury' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['recovery of Compensation and Common Law Damages' "infant Worker's Receipt of Compensation" 'third Party Liability for Workplace Related Injury' "effect of Cl. 20 and Cl. 24 of the Schedule to the Workers' Compensation Acts 1916 to 1952 Q."]

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

Civil Appeal Concerning Personal Injury Damages and Workers' Compensation / Appeal From a Judgment of the Supreme Court of Queensland

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent, an infant worker who received workers' compensation under the Queensland Act, was precluded from maintaining an action for damages against third party defendants." 'Whether Farmer & Co. Ltd. v. Griffiths applied to the Queensland legislation despite cl. 20 of the schedule giving persons under twenty-one capacity to give a valid receipt and discharge for moneys paid under the Act.' 'Whether actual payment of compensation under the Queensland Act was an answer to a common law damages claim against a third party.']

Ratio Decidendi

Farmer & Co. Ltd. v. Griffiths and Cain v. Malone rested on a supposed incapacity of an infant to give a binding receipt for workers' compensation. That reasoning did not apply under the Queensland Act because cl. 20 expressly made the receipt of a person under twenty-one a good and valid discharge in law and allowed such a person to agree on compensation with the Insurance Commissioner. The respondent therefore had capacity to recover compensation within cl. 24, and his receipt of compensation carried the statutory consequences under s. 9 and cl. 24, precluding his damages action against the appellants.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Order that the judgment of the Supreme Court of Queensland (Matthews J.) be discharged.' 'In lieu thereof order that there be judgment for the defendants in the action with costs.']