TRANSPORT COMMISSION v NUGENT and ANOR

1 VR 37·TADGELL (1), ORMISTON (2) and SMITH JJ (3)
[1996] 1 VR 37
TRANSPORT COMMISSION v NUGENT and ANOR SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA APPEAL DIVISION TADGELL (1), ORMISTON (2) and SMITH JJ (3) 2, 6, 7 June, 07 July 1994 Arbitration and awardsAwardWhen madeAppealTime limit for appeal Seaman's compensationArbitration by County Court judgeWhether County Court proceeding Seamen's Compensation Act 1911 (Cth) s5, Sch 2Seamen's Compensation Regulations 1926 (Cth) Reg30, Reg31, Reg36County Court Act 1958 (No 62300) s74. . A claim for compensation from the Transport Commission under the Seamen's Compensation Act 1911 (Cth) was determined by arbitration by a County Court judge under Sch 2 to that Act. The judge gave oral reasons for decision on 20 May 1993 awarding the claimants compensation. He gave further oral reasons awarding interest on 25 May 1993. On 27 May 1993 the judge signed a memorandum recording the award, which was filed on that day in the County Court Registry. By notice of appeal dated 16 June 1993 the Transport Commission appealed from the award to the Full Court of the Supreme Court. Para(3) of Sch 2 to the Seamen's Compensation Act provided that an arbitration award would be final subject to any appeal to the Supreme Court made within the time and in accordance with the conditions prescribed in the regulations. R36(2) of the Seamen's Compensation Regulations (Cth) permitted appeals within 21 days after "the decision appealed against is made". Reg31(1) required the judge to draw up, sign and make his award and cause it to be filed at the office of the registrar. The claimants argued the appeal was out of time because it was not brought within 21 days of the award being made. The Transport Commission argued it had a right of appeal under s74 of the County Court Act 1958, alternatively that its appeal was within the time prescribed by Reg36(2). HELD: (1) The matter was an arbitration in the County Court under Sch 2 to the Seamen's Compensation Act and not a civil proceeding of the County Court. Therefore there was no right of appeal under s74 of the County Court Act and the only right of appeal was under Sch 2 to the Seamen's Compensation Act and the regulations under it. (2) A decision or order is made when the person given the task of deciding the application has done all that is required of that person to give a final decision or order on the matter under consideration. (3) Under the applicable statutory regime the arbitrator in the present case did not make a decision until he had drawn up, signed and made his award. As a matter of form and substance this was not until the judge signed the document recording the result of the arbitration on 27 May 1993. Accordingly the appeal was brought within the time required by Reg36(2) of the Seamen's Compensation Regulations.

""

Continue Reading This Report

[1996] 1 VR 37

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