New South Wales
Court of Appeal
CITATION: Chubs Constructions Pty Ltd v Sam Chamma (No 2) [2010] NSWCA 225 HEARING DATE(S): On the papers
JUDGMENT DATE:
3 September 2010JUDGMENT OF: Beazley JA at 1; McColl JA at 1; Mathews AJA at 1 DECISION: Each party is to pay its and his own costs of the appeal. CATCHWORDS: COSTS – costs of appeal in work injury damages matter – Work Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998, s 346 – whether s 346 governs costs in relation to an appeal against costs – Smith v Sydney West Area Health Service (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 62 - COSTS – costs of appeal in work injury damages matter – Workers Compensation Regulation 2003, cl 91 – whether cl 91 governs costs in relation to an appeal against costs – whether parties should bear their own costs of an appeal against costs - COSTS – costs of appeal in work injury damages matter – Workers Compensation Regulation 2003, cl 93 – ancillary proceedings – whether cl 93 governs costs in relation to an appeal against costs – whether the UCPR should apply in relation to costs - WORDS & PHRASES – ancillary proceeding – Workers Compensation Regulation 2003, cl 93 LEGISLATION CITED: Civil Procedure Act 2005
Proceeds of Crime Act 1987 (Cth)
Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 (Cth)
Telecommunications (Low-Impact Facilities) Determination 1997
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998
Workers Compensation Act 1987
Workers Compensation Regulation 2003
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998CASES CITED: Clutha Developments Pty Ltd v Barry (1989) 18 NSWLR 86
Director of Housing v Hutchinson 3G Australia Pty Ltd [2003] VSC 310
Fraser Credits Pty Ltd v Osterberg-Olsen [1978] 1 NSWLR 121
Martin v O’Reilly (1914) 14 SR (NSW) 277
McCleary v DPP (1998) 157 ALR 301
Newcastle City Council v McShane (No 3) [2005] NSWCA 437; 65 NSWLR 155
New South Wales Crime Commission v Ollis [2006] NSWCA 76; 65 NSWLR 478
Smith v Sydney West Area Health Service (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 62
Wilson v State Rail Authority of New South Wales and Anor [2009] NSWSC 1455
Woodcroft v Director of Public Prosecutions [2000] NSWCA 128PARTIES: Chubs Constructions Pty Ltd (Appellant)
Sam Chamma (Respondent)FILE NUMBER(S): CA 2008/290162 COUNSEL: S Campbell SC; D P O'Dowd (Appellant)
P Semmler QC (Respondent)SOLICITORS: Bartier Perry Solicitors (Appellant)
CMC Lawyers (Respondent)LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Supreme Court - Common Law Division LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): SC 20252/05 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Patten AJ LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 7 May 2008 LOWER COURT MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: Sam Chamma v Solima & Sons & Anor [2008] NSWSC 382
- 1 -
2008/290162
3 September 2010BEAZLEY JA
McCOLL JA
MATHEWS AJA
Chubs Constructions Pty Ltd v Sam Chamma (No 2)
Judgment
1 THE COURT: The respondent brought a claim for work injury damages against his employer, the appellant. He also claimed damages for personal injuries against a third party. He…
Continue reading Chubs Constructions Pty Ltd v Chamma (No 2)
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Chubs Constructions Pty Ltd v Chamma (No 2) [2010] NSWCA 225
- Case
- [2010] NSWCA 225
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Chubs Constructions Pty Ltd v Chamma (No 2)*, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered an application for costs following an appeal in a work injury damages matter. The dispute concerned the appropriate application of various legislative provisions and court rules to the costs of the appeal itself.
The central legal issues before the Court were whether section 346 of the *Work Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998* (NSW), clause 91 of the *Workers Compensation Regulation 2003* (NSW), or clause 93 of the *Workers Compensation Regulation 2003* (NSW) governed the costs of the appeal. Specifically, the Court had to determine if these provisions applied to an appeal against costs, and whether the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (UCPR) should apply in relation to such costs, particularly in the context of ancillary proceedings.
The Court reasoned that the provisions of the *Workers Compensation Act 1998* and the *Workers Compensation Regulation 2003* were intended to govern the costs of proceedings within the workers compensation jurisdiction. However, the Court found that the specific wording of section 346 and clauses 91 and 93 did not clearly extend to appeals against costs orders made in the primary proceedings. The Court also considered the definition of "ancillary proceeding" under clause 93 and concluded that the appeal against costs did not fall within its scope. In light of the ambiguity and the specific nature of the appeal, the Court determined that it was appropriate for each party to bear their own costs of the appeal.
The central legal issues before the Court were whether section 346 of the *Work Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998* (NSW), clause 91 of the *Workers Compensation Regulation 2003* (NSW), or clause 93 of the *Workers Compensation Regulation 2003* (NSW) governed the costs of the appeal. Specifically, the Court had to determine if these provisions applied to an appeal against costs, and whether the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (UCPR) should apply in relation to such costs, particularly in the context of ancillary proceedings.
The Court reasoned that the provisions of the *Workers Compensation Act 1998* and the *Workers Compensation Regulation 2003* were intended to govern the costs of proceedings within the workers compensation jurisdiction. However, the Court found that the specific wording of section 346 and clauses 91 and 93 did not clearly extend to appeals against costs orders made in the primary proceedings. The Court also considered the definition of "ancillary proceeding" under clause 93 and concluded that the appeal against costs did not fall within its scope. In light of the ambiguity and the specific nature of the appeal, the Court determined that it was appropriate for each party to bear their own costs of the appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
Each party is to pay its and his own costs of the appeal.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.