Visscher v SafeWork NSW [2024] NSWIRComm 1038

Visscher v SafeWork NSW [2024] NSWIRComm 1038

The grounds advanced by Visscher do not disclose appellable error: the finding he was conducting an 'undertaking' was a jurisdictional fact reasonably open on the evidence; procedural fairness was not denied, as no significant disadvantage arose from evidentiary rulings; no substantial question of law or principle supports leave to appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Leave to Appeal, Full Bench Review
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
['industrial Relations Commission Appeals' 'work Health and Safety Act Interpretation' 'procedural Fairness' 'external Review of Prohibition Notice']
['employment and Industrial Law'] ['industrial Relations Commission Appeals' 'work Health and Safety Act Interpretation' 'procedural Fairness' 'external Review of Prohibition Notice']

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 / Leave to Appeal, Full Bench Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Commissioner's decision dismissing application under s 229 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 for external review of a prohibition notice" "Whether Commissioner erred in finding an owner-builder constructing a dwelling was conducting an 'undertaking' within the meaning of the WHS Act" "Whether Commissioner erred in finding the inspector held the 'reasonable belief' required by s 195 for issuing the prohibition notice" 'Whether procedural fairness was denied by not permitting rebuttal evidence' 'Whether the decision at first instance was affected by error']

Ratio Decidendi

The grounds advanced by Visscher do not disclose appellable error: the finding he was conducting an 'undertaking' was a jurisdictional fact reasonably open on the evidence; procedural fairness was not denied, as no significant disadvantage arose from evidentiary rulings; no substantial question of law or principle supports leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is refused']