Insurance

Return to Publications
02 May 2018
 

In 2015, the Workers Compensation Commission determined in State of New South Wales v Stockwell [2015] NSWWCCPD 9 (“Stockwell”) that an injured worker’s entitlement to Section 60 medical expenses does not theoretically cease in the event that they permanently move abroad.

 State of New South Wales v Stockwell [2015] NSWWCCPD 9

24 Apr 2018
 

Rankin Ellison Lawyers recently defended the Insurer of the Secretary, Department of Education (“Respondent”) in an action brought by Mr Vaughan (“Appellant”) in the Workers Compensation Commission. Upon losing his claim, the Appellant appealed the Arbitrator’s first instance decision.

Vaughan v Secretary, Department of Education [2018] NSWWCCPD (10 January 2018)


19 Apr 2018
 

Section 59A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) (‘1987 Act’) provides that an injured worker is not entitled to compensation in respect of any treatment, service or assistance that is given or provided after the compensation period has elapsed. However, there are a number of exceptions to that rule. Importantly for the purpose of this case note, the rule does not apply to the provision of “artificial aids”.

Pacific National v Baldacchino [2018] NSWWCCPD 12 (28 March 2018)


28 Feb 2018
 

This matter arose out of a helicopter crash that resulted in the death of three people. Legal action was commenced by an array of litigants, including the dependants of two of the three deceased persons. Further, a number of additional claims and cross-claims were made by the respective Defendants to the initial proceedings.

 South West Helicopters Pty Ltd v Stephenson [2017] NSWCA 312

 

15 Feb 2018
 

The Deceased, John Hemmes, died on 1 March 2015 aged 83. The Plaintiff, Edward Cameron, was born in 1990 following an extra marital affair between his mother and the Deceased. The Deceased never acknowledged the Plaintiff as his child, despite confirmation through DNA testing.

 Estate Hemmes; Cameron v Mead [2018] NSWSC 85


08 Feb 2018
 

The President of the Workers Compensation Commission recently overturned a finding that a bull rider was a deemed worker engaged by the Australian Bushman’s Campdraft and Rodeo Association Ltd (ABCRA) and the Camden Show Society Inc (CSS) for the purposes of workers compensation.

Australian Bushman’s Campdraft and Rodeo Association Ltd v Gajkowski [2017] NSWWCCPD 54 & The Camden Show Society Inc v Gajkowski [2017] NSWWCCPD 55

 

07 Feb 2018
 

The Plaintiff, Steven George Villanti, commenced separate legal action against two entities that he alleged were liable for work injuries that he had sustained. The separate proceedings were joined and heard concurrently in the Supreme Court of NSW. Both the first Defendant, Coles, and the second Defendant, Allstaff, filed cross claims against one another. Their respective claims concerned various aspects of the law including civil liability legislation, motor vehicle accident legislation, and workers compensation legislation.

 Steven George Villanti v Coles Group Supply Chain Pty Limited; Steven George Villanti v All Staff Australia NSW Pty Ltd t/as Allstaff Australia [2017] NSWSC 1231

 

31 Jan 2018
 

The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against the decision of the Commission, who had dismissed an appeal brought by the Appellant (Tudor Capital Australia, “Tudor”). Tudor had originally appealed against the decision of the Arbitrator, who found in favour of the Respondent (Ms Christensen) in respect of a claim for compensation for her late husband’s death under Sections 9 and 25 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.

 Tudor Capital Australia Pty Limited v Christensen [2017] NSWCA 260

30 Jan 2018
 

The Defendant (Coles Supermarkets) belatedly sought leave on the second day of proceedings to serve four ‘supplementary’ expert reports, which was refused by the Court. In considering the leave application, the Court was required to determine whether the Defendant had established the existence of ‘exceptional circumstances’ in accordance with Rule 31.28 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (‘the Rules’), which would justify an exercise of the Court’s discretion to allow the additional reports to be tendered. The operation of Rule 31.34 regarding the use and serving of supplementary reports as well as general Rules governing the conduct of parties during proceedings was also explored. 

Williams v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Limited [2017] NSWSC 1326

21 Dec 2017
 

This matter is a Section 151Z recovery case which was appealed to the Court of Appeal on the basis that the primary judge had not provided sufficient reasons to explain his findings on causation.

Barnes v The State of New South Wales [2017] NSWCA 254

29 Nov 2017
 

The Appellant originally commenced proceedings in the District Court alleging negligence on behalf of Maitland City Council as well as Maitland City Tennis Club Inc, after he was injured when he tripped and fell while playing tennis at the Club. Balla DCJ dismissed Mr Passmore’s claim, finding that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate that he tripped as a result of the condition of the tennis court. The Court of Appeal subsequently dismissed the appeal, finding no error in fact or law with Balla DCJ’s judgment.

Passmore v Maitland City Council [2017] NSWCA 253

 

22 Nov 2017
 

The Applicant, Ms Fallone, sustained two separate workplace injuries in the course of her employment with the Respondent, for which she received compensation, and also sustained injuries as a result of an unrelated motor vehicle accident. She underwent unapproved right shoulder surgery, and later brought proceedings in the Commission for the costs associated with the surgery as well as payment for a period of incapacity which resulted thereafter. The Arbitrator entered an award in favour of the Respondent, finding that the surgery and her subsequent incapacity was not sufficiently connected to her workplace injuries.

Barbara Fallone v South Western Sydney Institute [2017] NSWWCC 174

16 Nov 2017
 

The Employer, Pidcock Panel Beating, appealed against the decision of the Arbitrator to allow referral of a previous assessment of permanent impairment for which a Certificate of Determination had been issued and compensation awarded. It contended that as the dispute had been finalised, Section 329 of the WIMA 1998 Act could not apply to allow the referral. 

Pidcock Panel Beating Pty Ltd v Nicolia [2017] NSWWCCPD 32 (25 July 2017)

09 Nov 2017
 
The worker, Milan Kabic, was employed by a labour hire Company (Caringbah Formwork) to work on a building site that was operated by Deicorp (the principal contractor) and Calcono (sub-contractor). He sustained significant injuries when he fell from framework whilst working on the site. 
Kabic v Workers Compensation Nominal Insurer (No 3) [2017] NSWSC 1281
25 Oct 2017
 

The worker claimed compensation for domestic assistance for the cost of house painting and for the cost of pool maintenance at the worker’s home.  The Workers Compensation Commission Arbitrator found in favour of the worker for the cost of painting his house, but not for the cost of pool maintenance.

Bellamy v Watertech Resources [2017] NSWWCC 195

19 Oct 2017
 
Applicant commenced proceedings in the WCC seeking further lump sum compensation following injuries to her right lower extremity and lumbar spine on 3 March 2010.  In previous proceedings Consent Orders were entered into for injuries to the right lower extremity and lumbar spine.

Karen Israel v Catering Industries (NSW) Pty Ltd [2017] NSWWCC 215 (7 September 2017)

19 Oct 2017
 

Piercy v Trimec Pty Ltd involved an application by the injured worker, Brenda Piercy, for domestic assistance under Section 60AA of the Workers Compensation Act 1987  (the ‘Act’). The central issue for determination by the Commission was whether the domestic assistance sought by the worker could exceed what had been provided in the care plan by the Insurer pursuant to subsection (d) of the Act, whilst still being ‘in accordance with’ that care plan.

Piercy v Trimec Pty Ltd [2017] NSWWCC 218

18 Oct 2017
 

The present case considered the exercise of the Court’s discretion to extend the limitation period pursuant to Section 151D(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the ‘Act’). Ultimately, Neilson DCJ granted leave and the reasons cited for this were; the Plaintiff’s complex history of injury and treatment, several delays in correspondence between the parties, a concession made in the Workers Compensation Commission (WCC) in 2015 and the fact the Plaintiff had a prima facie case on liability. 

 Bright v State of New South Wales [2017] NSWDC 257

 

12 Oct 2017
 

In this matter the Workers Compensation Commission found in favour of the Applicant (Tina Bellamy) in respect of a fracture she sustained to her ankle when exiting the shopping centre in which her employer’s premises was located.  

Tina Bellamy & Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Limited [2017] NSWWCC 216

 

24 Aug 2017
 

In this case the Court dismissed an appeal brought by Mr Abdul Raad against a decision which had awarded him $75,547 in damages. Mr Raad had slipped and fallen on a wet, tiled area located in a shopping village occupied by VM & KTP Holdings. The damages awarded to him reflected a 10% reduction in potential damages by virtue of a finding of contributory negligence on Mr Raad’s part. 

Raad v VM & KTP Holdings Pty Ltd as Trustee for VM & KTP Nguyen Family Trust [2017] NSWCA 190

Return to Publications

CONTACT OUR TEAM
 
Sydney: 02 8297 5900 Newcastle: 02 4929 9333  

Submit your enquiry via the form below and we will reply
within the next business day.

*Required fields












Your privacy is important to us. Any information that you give to us remains confidential and will not be shared.