Hare v Mt Isa Mines Ltd

The appeal before the Court was brought by Hare against Mt Isa Mines Ltd. The dispute centred on whether the respondent's notice of claim under the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld) was compliant, and if not, whether the trial judge correctly set aside the declaration that it was. The Court of Appeal was tasked with determining the adequacy of the trial judge's reasons, the compliance of the notice, and whether the declaration was wrongly made. Additionally, the Court needed to consider if the respondent had remedied the non-compliance and if the Court should allow the respondent to proceed with the claim despite the non-compliance.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge's reasons were inadequate as they did not address the key issues of whether the notice was compliant and whether the declaration was correctly made. The Court held that the notice was not compliant as it did not specify the particulars required by the Act. Furthermore, the Court concluded that the declaration was wrongly made because the trial judge failed to properly assess the compliance of the notice. The Court also noted that the respondent had not remedied the non-compliance within the time allowed by the Act. Therefore, the Court set aside the declaration and costs order made at first instance.

The appeal was allowed, and the declaration and costs order made at first instance were set aside. The application for a stay was dismissed, and the respondent was ordered to pay the appellants' costs of the application at first instance and of the application and appeal in this Court. Additionally, ex tempore orders by McMurdo P vacated an earlier order and directed the parties to make written submissions as to costs in accordance with the relevant practice direction.