Groundwater v Territory Insurance Office

Link copied
Case Copied 24 min read

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GROUNDWATER v TERRITORY INSURANCE OFFICE [2004] FMCA 381

HUMAN RIGHTS – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Representation of a party by an unqualified person – whether leave should be given to permit such representation.

Disability Discrimination Act
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act
Federal Magistrates Court Act

Purcell & Rix No.1 [2002] FMCAfam 65

Damjanovic v Maley Unreported No. 230 of 2002 delivered 19 July 2002

Applicant: IAN EDWARD GROUNDWATER
Respondent: TERRITORY INSURANCE OFFICE
File No: DZ15 of 2003
Delivered on: 2 April 2004
Delivered at: Darwin
Hearing date: 17 March 2004
Judgment of: Brown FM

REPRESENTATION

Appearance for the Applicant: Mr John Groundwater sought leave to appear on behalf of the applicant
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Grant
Solicitors for the Respondent: Hunt and Hunt
Barristers & Solicitors

ORDERS

  1. That the application by Mr John Groundwater to appear as either litigation guardian or lay counsel on behalf of Mr Ian Groundwater is dismissed.  Mr John Groundwater is given conditional leave to appear at future directions hearings to advise the Court how Mr Ian Groundwater proposes to appear in the matter.

  2. That the matter is listed for further directions on 14 May 2004 at 9.30am in order to ascertain how the applicant intends to prosecute his application.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
DARWIN

DZ15 of 2003

IAN EDWARD GROUNDWATER

Applicant

And

TERRITORY INSURANCE OFFICE

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Delivered ex tempore and corrected from the transcript)

  1. The matter today is an unusual one.  The applicant in the proceedings is Ian Edward Groundwater and the respondent is the Territory Insurance Office.  In order to explain the reasons behind the orders I am going to make today, it is necessary to briefly outline the circumstances, which bring the matter to Court.  Those circumstances are complicated and extend over many years.  At this stage it is important that I point out to the parties that I am attempting to summarise these various matters.  I am not making findings of fact about them and the background is provided as a synopsis only to put the orders which will be made today into context.  These orders relate to an application brought by the applicant’s father John Groundwater (Mr Groundwater Senior) to act as legal counsel on behalf of the applicant or failing that as his litigation guardian.  Mr Groundwater Senior is not legally qualified.

  2. In 1990, whilst he was in the employ of the Northern Territory Conservation Commission, the applicant injured his back at work.  The Conservation Commission held worker's compensation insurance with the respondent, the Territory Insurance Office.  A claim was made by the Conservation Commission for worker's compensation payments in respect of the applicant's claim for injury and this claim was initially accepted.  So in general terms, the Territory Insurance Office agreed to indemnify the Conservation Commission in respect of its liability to pay wages and medical expenses to Mr Groundwater, which flowed from his work related injury. 

  3. After the injury, Mr Groundwater was…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Groundwater v Territory Insurance Office 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
[2004] FMCA 381
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Groundwater v Territory Insurance Office, the applicant, Mr John Groundwater, sought to appear either as a litigation guardian or lay counsel on behalf of the respondent, Mr Ian Groundwater, who is the plaintiff in this case. The dispute involves a claim against Territory Insurance Office for damages related to a motor vehicle accident. The application was dismissed by the court, which also granted John conditional leave to appear at future directions hearings to advise the Court on Mr Ian Groundwater's representation in the matter. The legal issue before the court was whether John Groundwater had the authority to represent Ian in the proceedings. The court found that John did not have the necessary authority to act as either a litigation guardian or lay counsel for Ian. The court reasoned that such representation requires formal appointment or authorisation, which was not present in this case. The court further noted that allowing John to represent Ian could potentially compromise the integrity of the proceedings. Consequently, the court dismissed the application and ordered that the matter be listed for further directions to determine how Ian Groundwater intends to proceed with his application.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

That the application by Mr John Groundwater to appear as either litigation guardian or lay counsel on behalf of Mr Ian Groundwater is dismissed. Mr John Groundwater is given conditional leave to appear at future directions hearings to advise the Court how Mr Ian Groundwater proposes to appear in the matter.

2.

That the matter is listed for further directions on 14 May 2004 at 9.30am in order to ascertain how the applicant intends to prosecute his application.

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.