Telstra Corporation Ltd v Aboushadi [2004] FCA 811
The Tribunal was not entitled to revisit or vary the February 2001 consent orders when determining the later review, because its review powers were confined to the decision under review. However, on the proper construction of consent order 1(b), the parties agreed for the purpose of assessing compensation that Mr Aboushadi's incapacity was confined to the period from the commencement of 14 September 1999 to the end of 13 September 2000. His retirement occurred before that agreed incapacity commenced, so s 19 rather than s 20 applied. The Tribunal's conclusion was therefore correct, subject to variation of the stated commencement time.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 June 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under S 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) Concerning Assessment of Compensation Under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (cth) / Federal Court Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Made on 19 January 2004
- Outcome
- The Administrative Appeals Tribunal order was varied as to the commencement time of incapacity; the appeal was otherwise dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['commonwealth Employees Compensation' 'administrative Appeals Tribunal Review Powers' 'consent Orders' 'incapacity for Work' 'superannuation Pension' 'application of Ss 19 and 20 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (cth)']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (cth) Concerning Assessment of Compensation Under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (cth) / Federal Court Appeal From Administrative Appeals Tribunal Decision Made on 19 January 2004
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal erred by determining the later review on the basis that it had power to revisit or vary earlier consent orders made by the Tribunal.' "Whether consent order 1(b) should be construed as an agreed definitive statement that the respondent's compensable incapacity commenced immediately after midnight on the evening of 13-14 September 1999 and ended on 13 September 2000." 'Whether compensation for the agreed period of incapacity was to be assessed under s 19 or s 20 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth).']
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal was not entitled to revisit or vary the February 2001 consent orders when determining the later review, because its review powers were confined to the decision under review. However, on the proper construction of consent order 1(b), the parties agreed for the purpose of assessing compensation that Mr Aboushadi's incapacity was confined to the period from the commencement of 14 September 1999 to the end of 13 September 2000. His retirement occurred before that agreed incapacity commenced, so s 19 rather than s 20 applied. The Tribunal's conclusion was therefore correct, subject to variation of the stated commencement time.
Court Disposition
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal order was varied as to the commencement time of incapacity; the appeal was otherwise dismissed with costs.
Orders
- ["The order made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on 19 January 2004 be varied by deleting the words 'and the time of his retirement coincided in time at 4.51 pm on 13 September 1999' and substituting the words 'was immediately after midnight on the evening of 13-14 September 1999, being after his retirement...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment