29 If the appellant's argument is correct, and for the purpose of resolving this appeal it is sufficient to assume that it is, it must nevertheless follow that the appeal should be dismissed. Upon receipt of the new claim the appellant was obliged by s81(1) to commence making weekly payments within the time prescribed, unless the case fell within subs(3), which provides that subs(1) does not apply to an employer who either, in accordance with s81A(1), disputes liability to make weekly payments, or, in accordance with s81AA, defers making a decision to accept or dispute liability to make weekly payments. Notwithstanding that as a matter of fact the appellant may have disputed its liability to pay, it did not do so as a matter of law. That is because, by s81A(1), an employer who disputes liability to make weekly payments must do two things within fourteen days of receiving the claim from the worker. Those two things are first, the service on the worker of a written notice that the employer disputes liability and, second, the referral of the matter to the Tribunal. There is no evidence before this Court that the first of those matters was done, although the appellant's counsel informed the Court that liability was denied in writing. Even assuming that the first requirement of s81A(1) was satisfied, there is no suggestion that the same can be said about the second requirement, for the appellant referred nothing to the Tribunal. The case came before the Tribunal, not because the appellant referred it, but because the respondent did so consequent upon the failure of the appellant to make the weekly payments.