Pilcher v H B Brady & Co Pty Ltd

[2005] WASCA 159

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Workers' Compensation
2. › Determination of level of disability
3. › Referral under s 93D(5)
4. › Whether review officer confined to nominated level of disability
5. › Whether nomination on Form 22 limits scope of determination
6. › Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981 (WA), ss 93D, 93E
1. Workers' Compensation
2. › Determination of level of disability
3. › Construction of Form 22 and reg 19J
4. › Whether regulations limit statutory power of review officer
5. › Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulations 1982 (WA), reg 19J
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Relationship between Act and subordinate legislation
3. › Whether intention of Parliament ascertainable from terms of delegated legislation
4. › Regulations amended after statutory provisions came into effect
5. › Exceptions to general rule
1. Appeal
2. › Court of Appeal sitting as bench of five
3. › Whether earlier decision of same court should be overruled
4. › Principles regarding departure from earlier decision
5. › Considerations justifying departure

Quick Take

When a worker lodges a Form 22 referral nominating a degree of disability of not less than 30%, the review officer is not confined to that level and may determine that the degree of disability is between 16% and 30%. The practice of lodging two separate referrals at different levels is no longer necessary. The intention of Parliament in enacting a statute cannot be ascertained by reference to the terms of a regulation amended after the statutory provisions came into effect, unless an exception applies.