PETER ISAACSON PUBLICATIONS PTY LTD v VICTORIAN WORKCOVER AUTHORITY

1 VR 49·BROOKING (1), SMITH (2) and ASHLEY JJ (3)
[1996] 1 VR 49
PETER ISAACSON PUBLICATIONS PTY LTD v VICTORIAN WORKCOVER AUTHORITY SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA APPEAL DIVISION BROOKING (1), SMITH (2) and ASHLEY JJ (3) 17, 18 May, 29 June 1995 Accident compensationAccident Compensation CommissionReclassification of establishmentDate of commencement of reclassificationAccident Compensation TribunalPower to review commission's decisionsPower to fix date of operation of reclassificationMeaning of "arising out of Accident Compensation Act 1985 (No 10191) s51, s53, s61(3), s181, s182, s187, s217, s218. . An employer applied on 6 September 1991 to the Accident Compensation Commission (which subsequently became the Victorian WorkCover Authority) for reclassification of two of four contiguous areas for the purposes of imposition of levy under PtVII of the Accident Compensation Act 1985. The commission ultimately decided on 25 June 1992 to reclassify one of the areas as requested as of 1 October 1991 but not the other. The employer appealed to the Accident Compensation Tribunal under s218 of the Accident Compensation Act against the refusal to reclassify the other area and osught that reclassification to take effect from an earlier date. The tribunal granted the application to reclassify the other area and determined that the reclassification should operate from 1 October 1991. The employer appealed to the court from the decision about the date of operatino of the reclassification. HELD, dismissing the appeal: (1) The Accident Compensation Tribunal had jurisdiction under s217 and s218 of the Accident Compensation Act to review the Accident Compensation Commission's decision concerning reclassification. S217 was concerned with the substance of the decision and the commission's decision was in substance that "the place" in question was "an establishment" within s217(6)(a). (2) The Accident Compensation Tribunal's power under s5(1)(b) of the Accident Compensation Act to hear and determine any question or matter arising out of any decision of the Accident Compensation Commission extended to but not beyond matters ancillary to any decision of the commission. The tribunal's incidental power, including power under s51(2), could not be used to change its function from reviewing the commission's decision to one of determining a question at first instance. (3) The Accident Compensation Tribunal had power under s218 of the Accident Compensation Act to back-date a decision to a time representing a reasonable time within which the decision under review could have been made. In this case, the Accident Compensation Commission could not have been expected to make a decision before 1 October 1991. The tribunal was therefore justified in fixing that as the operative date for the reclassification. Decision of the Accident Compensation Tribunal (21 October 1992) affirmed.

""

Continue Reading This Report

[1996] 1 VR 49

One-off Purchase

$25
This report only
Permanent access
PDF download
Best Value

Digital Subscription

$45/mo
or $450/yrSAVE $90
All reports included
Unlimited access
Cancel anytime
Don't have an account? Create Account