Deeks v Harmer Steel Erection Pty Ltd

The appeal in Deeks v Harmer Steel Erection Pty Ltd concerns the refusal by the Commission constituted by an Arbitrator to award costs to the Appellant Worker. The matter was before the Commission constituted by a Presidential member who must determine whether the application meets the statutory threshold requirements for leave to appeal under the 1998 Act. Specifically, the issue is whether the amount of compensation at stake in the appeal is both at least $5,000 and at least 20% of the amount awarded in the decision appealed against.

The legal issues before the court were whether the Arbitrator erred in not awarding the Appellant Worker the costs of the proceedings and whether the Appellant Worker was denied procedural fairness by the Arbitrator in not seeking submissions on costs prior to making the order. The Arbitrator found that neither party was entirely successful in the substantive proceedings and that costs should fall where they lie, hence no order for costs was made. The Appellant Worker argued that the Arbitrator failed to consider the costs issue properly and that this was a denial of procedural fairness.

The Commission held that the statutory provisions concerning the amount of compensation at issue in an appeal do not apply to an order for costs. As such, there was no dispute before the Commission about an amount of compensation between the parties. The appeal related solely to the issue of costs, and therefore, the Appellant Worker could not meet the threshold requirements of section 352(2) of the 1998 Act. The Commission refused leave to appeal, as the amount at issue in the appeal did not meet the statutory threshold.

The Commission, constituted by a Presidential member, dismissed the appeal and refused leave to appeal. The Appellant Worker's application for leave to appeal was denied as the amount of compensation at issue, being the costs, did not satisfy the threshold requirements of section 352(2) of the 1998 Act.