Gillan v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2)

Link copied
Case Copied 5 min read

QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

CITATION:

Gillan v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2) [2021] QIRC 331

PARTIES:     

Gillan, Jennifer
(Appellant)

v

Workers' Compensation Regulator
(Respondent)

CASE NO.:

WC/2019/36

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against decision of the Workers' Compensation Regulator

DELIVERED ON:

24 September 2021
DATES OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:

Respondent's written submissions filed on 20 September 2021 and Appellant's written submissions filed on 23 September 2021

MEMBER:

HEARD AT:

Merrell DP

On the papers

ORDER:

The Appellant pays the Respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $4,452.30.

CATCHWORDS:

WORKERS' COMPENSATION - ENTITLEMENT TO AND LIABILITY FOR COMPENSATION - APPEAL AGAINST REVIEW DECISION - COSTS - appeal decision in favour of respondent - whether costs of the hearing should follow the event - consent by appellant as to costs order sought by respondent - costs order in favour of respondent

LEGISLATION:

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999, sch 2, pt 2

Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003, s 558

Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2014, s 132

CASES:

Gillan v Workers' Compensation Regulator [2021] QIRC 315

Workers' Compensation Regulator v Queensland Nurses and Midwives' Union of Employees [2021] ICQ 13

APPEARANCES:

Derek Legal for the Appellant.

Mr B. McMillan of Counsel directly instructed by Ms J. Webb of the Respondent.

Reasons for Decision

Introduction

  1. By decision dated 10 September 2021, I made an order confirming the decision appealed against by Ms Gillan. The order was made pursuant to s 558(1)(a) of the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 ('the Act').[1] I also ordered that the parties make submissions on the costs of the hearing and that unless otherwise ordered, I would make the decision about costs on the papers.

  2. The parties have made submissions on costs.

  3. This is my decision about the costs of the hearing.

Background

  1. Ms Gillan's appeal was originally set down for hearing on 10 and 11 June 2020. Due to the late disclosure by Ms Gillan, on 10 June 2020, of her intention to adduce evidence of matters beyond those in her Statement of Facts and Contentions, I adjourned the hearing.

  2. By order dated 10 June 2020, I ordered that pursuant to s 558(3) of the Act, to the extent provided by s 132(2) of the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2014 ('the Regulation'), Ms Gillan pay the Regulator's costs thrown away by the adjournment of her appeal on 10 June 2020.

  3. The appeal was then heard on 24 and 25 September 2020.

    The parties' submissions

  4. The Regulator submits, having regard to the decision of Davis J, President, in Workers' Compensation Regulator v Queensland Nurses and Midwives' Union of Employees ('QNMU'),[2] that:

    ·the power to award the costs of the hearing comes from the Act;

    ·section 558(3) of the Act is limited to the costs of the hearing; and

    ·the Commission must give reasons for the exercise of the discretion to award costs.

    [2] [2021] ICQ 13 ('QNMU'), [16]-[32].

  5. There can be no dispute about the…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Gillan v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2) and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2021] QIRC 331
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Gillan, the appellant, brought a case against the Workers' Compensation Regulator, the respondent, in the context of a workers' compensation dispute. The nature of the disagreement was whether the appellant was entitled to compensation, and if so, the extent of the respondent's liability. The matter was heard and determined in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The appellant, who was appealing a decision from a previous review, sought to overturn the findings of the Workers' Compensation Regulator.

The central legal issues the court had to resolve included whether the appellant was entitled to compensation and, if so, the extent of the respondent's liability. Additionally, the court needed to consider the appropriate costs order for the proceedings. The appellant argued for a reversal of the review decision, while the respondent maintained that the original decision should stand and sought costs for the hearing.

The court found in favour of the respondent, upholding the original review decision. In its reasoning, the court examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The court concluded that the appellant had not successfully demonstrated that the original review decision was flawed. Regarding costs, the court noted that the appellant had consented to the costs order sought by the respondent. Consequently, the court ordered that the appellant pay the respondent's costs, which were fixed at $4,452.30. This decision was based on the appellant's consent and the court's assessment of the proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Appellant pays the Respondent's costs fixed in the sum of $4,452.30.

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.