Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 22 JANUARY 2020

Outfoxed? Workers compensation appeals

This case turns on its facts, but is useful for guidance provided by His Honour as to what constitutes a question of law.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

On 11 December 2019 Quail DCJ handed down his decision in Fox v Roy Hill Holdings Pty Ltd [2019] WADC 171.

The appellant, James Fox, was employed as a truck driver by the respondent, Roy Hill Holdings Pty Ltd. On 8 October 2017 Mr Fox was injured at work. He claimed to have injured his left shoulder and neck.

Following a WorkCover arbitration it was determined however, that he had only sustained an injury to his left shoulder but not to his neck.

Mr Fox appealed the decision pursuant to Section 247 Workers' Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981.

To proceed, Mr Fox first had to persuade the District Court to grant leave to appeal. There are a number of prerequisites for leave to be granted, but primarily the arbitrator who made the decision being appealed against, must have made an error on a question of law.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Kott Gunning is a proud member of

See more popular content from