QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION
CITATION: | Gillan v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2) [2021] QIRC 331 |
PARTIES: | Gillan, Jennifer v Workers' Compensation Regulator |
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
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.
The parties have made submissions on costs.
This is my decision about the costs of the hearing.
Background
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.
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.
The appeal was then heard on 24 and 25 September 2020.
The parties' submissions
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].
There can be no dispute about the…
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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2021] QIRC 331
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
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.