HIH Casualty & General Insurance Ltd v Territory Insurance Office ; 120 NTR 24; 143 FLR 142; 10 ANZ Ins Cas 61-392

120 NTR 24; [1998] NTSC 3

Supreme Court of the Northern Territory

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Workers' Compensation
2. › Contribution between insurers
3. › Extension of time to commence proceedings
4. › Discretion to extend time
5. › Relevant considerations
6. › Whether Work Health Court erred in exercise of discretion
7. › Work Health Act (NT), s 126A(2)(b)
1. Workers' Compensation
2. › Contribution between insurers
3. › Notification requirement
4. › Whether notification given 'as soon as practicable'
5. › Reference point for determining when obligation arises
6. › Whether insurer required to make medical enquiries before notification obligation crystallises
7. › Work Health Act (NT), s 126A(2)(a)
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Workers' compensation legislation
3. › Whether notification under s 126A(2)(a) is precondition to claiming contribution under s 126A(2)(b)
4. › Expressio unius maxim
5. › Comparison with ss 80(1) and 182(1)
6. › Work Health Act (NT), s 126A
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Workers' compensation legislation
3. › Meaning of 'has indemnified' in s 126A(2)
4. › Whether requires actual payment or acceptance of liability
5. › Work Health Act (NT), s 126A(2)

Quick Take

Under s126A(2)(a) of the Work Health Act (NT), the reference point for determining when an insurer must notify another insurer 'as soon as practicable' is when the insurer has reasonable grounds for supposing the other insurer may be liable — which typically requires medical evidence, not merely a worker's bare assertion on a claim form. Notification under s126A(2)(a) is not a precondition to claiming contribution under s126A(2)(b). 'Has indemnified' in s126A(2) means acceptance of liability under the policy, not actual payment.