Page v Telstra Corporation Limited [2003] FCA 478

Page v Telstra Corporation Limited [2003] FCA 478

The Tribunal made no reviewable error of law. On the authorities, Table 9.4 required a single assessment of upper limb function as a whole and did not permit separate assessments of individual fingers or groups of fingers to be added or combined. The Tribunal was entitled to accept Dr Macfarlane's evidence that the applicant's overall impairment was largely due to rheumatoid arthritis and that the work-related component was at most 5% whole person impairment, below the s 24(7) threshold. Section 24(8) did not apply because the impairment advanced and found was loss of upper limb or upper extremity function, not impairment constituted by the loss, or loss of use, of a finger assessed as such.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal to the Federal Court From an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Under S 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) Concerning Lump Sum Compensation for Permanent Impairment Under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (cth). / Judgment on the Application; Application Dismissed.
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['commonwealth Employees' 'permanent Impairment Compensation' 'guide to the Assessment of the Degree of Permanent Impairment' 'musculo Skeletal Impairment Tables' 'appeal on a Question of Law From the Administrative Appeals Tribunal']
["workers' Compensation" 'administrative Law'] ['commonwealth Employees' 'permanent Impairment Compensation' 'guide to the Assessment of the Degree of Permanent Impairment' 'musculo Skeletal Impairment Tables' 'appeal on a Question of Law From the Administrative Appeals Tribunal']

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 to the Federal Court From an Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Under S 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) Concerning Lump Sum Compensation for Permanent Impairment Under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (cth). / Judgment on the Application; Application Dismissed.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal erred in law in deciding that s 24(8) of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) did not apply.' "Whether the Tribunal erred in failing to assess the applicant's impairment as loss of the use of a finger rather than loss of upper limb or upper extremity function." 'Whether the Tribunal committed reviewable error in its use or non-use of Tables 9.1, 9.3 and 9.4 of the Guide to the Assessment of the Degree of Permanent Impairment.' "Whether the Tribunal was entitled to accept Dr Macfarlane's assessment that no more than 5% whole person impairment was work-related."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal made no reviewable error of law. On the authorities, Table 9.4 required a single assessment of upper limb function as a whole and did not permit separate assessments of individual fingers or groups of fingers to be added or combined. The Tribunal was entitled to accept Dr Macfarlane's evidence that the applicant's overall impairment was largely due to rheumatoid arthritis and that the work-related component was at most 5% whole person impairment, below the s 24(7) threshold. Section 24(8) did not apply because the impairment advanced and found was loss of upper limb or upper extremity function, not impairment constituted by the loss, or loss of use, of a finger assessed as such.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.' "The applicant to pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the application, including reserved costs, if any, to be taxed if not agreed."]