Home | © 2018 GA Publishing Mosman Sydney for legal practitioners


Raniere Nominees &c v Daley and Anor [2006] NSWCA 235, Santow JA said at [66]: "Thus, in acting judicially in its decision-making, the Commission is governed by statute. It does not possess an inherent jurisdiction but only such powers which are incidental and necessary to the exercise of its statutory jurisdiction; see DJL v Central Authority [2000] HCA 17; 201 CLR 226 at [24ff].

"It has no statutory power expressly permitting it to extend the time for the employer to make the application under s 145(3). I do not consider that use of the word 'may' in s 145(3) does so impliedly; the section is an enabling one so that 'may' in effect means 'must'.."

Carrington Abrasive Cleaners Pty Limited v Standen [2009] NSWWCCPD 143. Roche DP. 4.11.09.

72. "Whilst the use of the word “may” generally indicates, if used to confer a power, that the power may be exercised or not: section 9 of the Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), it is my view that the Commission would only decline to conduct a [s 55] review in circumstances where the change of circumstances relied upon made no material difference to the award being reviewed."

Previous page: Reasonable and probable cause     Next page: Medical appeal panel

© 2018 GA Publishing Mosman Sydney | piets/wcms | Account

Common Law Monthly Summaries

12 editions $385 incl GST

Subscribe Sample