Moir v Schrader [1936] HCA 69

Moir v Schrader [1936] HCA 69

The High Court being equally divided, the principle decided was that the respondents had not undertaken the firewood business so as to invoke sec. 6(3)(a) liability, or the work performed was ancillary and not part and parcel of their business as required by statute; accordingly, the commission erred in awarding compensation against the respondents.

Parties
Applicant: William John Moir; Respondent: Willoughby Douglas Schrader; Respondent: Charles McAlister Campbell Shannon
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Principal and Contractor Liability, Injury Arising Out of Employment, Workers' Compensation Act Interpretation
Workers' Compensation Principal and Contractor Liability Injury Arising Out of Employment Workers' Compensation Act Interpretation

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William John Moir

Applicant

Willoughby Douglas Schrader

Respondent

Charles McAlister Campbell Shannon

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents were 'principals' within sec. 6(3)(a) of Workers' Compensation Act 1926-1929 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether respondents were carrying on a firewood business at time of injury
  3. 3 Whether applicant was employed in execution of work under contract for firewood business purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court being equally divided, the principle decided was that the respondents had not undertaken the firewood business so as to invoke sec. 6(3)(a) liability, or the work performed was ancillary and not part and parcel of their business as required by statute; accordingly, the commission erred in awarding compensation against the respondents.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.