Craig v Workers Compensation Tribunal & Anor

(2004) 88 SASR 311; [2004] SASC 410

Supreme Court of South Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Jurisdictional error
4. › Inferior courts distinguished from administrative tribunals
5. › Whether denial of procedural fairness by court or court-like body constitutes jurisdictional error
6. › Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1986 (SA), s 88I
1. Administrative Law
2. › Procedural fairness
3. › Denial of natural justice
4. › Failure to give opportunity to be heard on dispositive issue
5. › Whether procedural unfairness by inferior court gives rise to excess or want of jurisdiction
1. Workers Compensation
2. › Appeals
3. › Full Bench of Workers Compensation Tribunal
4. › Nature of Tribunal as court or court-like body
5. › Scope of supervisory jurisdiction
6. › Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1986 (SA), ss 31(5), 85, 87A, 88I

Quick Take

A denial of procedural fairness by the Full Bench of the Workers Compensation Tribunal, being a court or court-like body, is an error within jurisdiction and does not attract the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under s 88I of the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1986 (SA). The requirement to accord procedural fairness is not a statutory condition of the Full Bench's jurisdiction but arises by implication from the nature of the body. The question whether denial of procedural fairness by a court constitutes jurisdictional error in the context of s 75(v) of the Constitution was noted as uncertain but not resolved.