Unilever Australia Ltd v Saab [2013] NSWCA 374
For the reasons given in Unilever Australia Ltd v Petrevska [2013] NSWCA 373, the orders proposed were made: the appellant was aware of the causal connection at relevant times, and the appeal was dismissed.
- Parties
- Appellant: Unilever Australia Ltd; Respondent: Ali Saab
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 November 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Determination
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed; costs awarded to respondent.
- Legal Topics
- Time Limit to Commence Compensation Claim, Awareness of Injury, Medical Advice and Causal Connection, Hearing Loss Due to Noisy Employment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Unilever Australia Ltd
Appellant
Ali Saab
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the worker was aware of the causal connection between gradual hearing loss and noisy employment for the purposes of s 261(6) Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998
- 2 Whether a worker's belief constitutes legal awareness where medical causation is a matter for expert opinion
- 3 Whether the claim is statute barred under the six month time limit
Ratio Decidendi
For the reasons given in Unilever Australia Ltd v Petrevska [2013] NSWCA 373, the orders proposed were made: the appellant was aware of the causal connection at relevant times, and the appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed; costs awarded to respondent.
Orders
- Grant leave to appeal.
- Direct the appellant to file, within seven days, a notice of appeal in the form supplied.
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