Healy v Logan City Council

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Healy v Logan City Council [2016] QDC 15

PARTIES:

MICHELLE MAREE HEALY
(plaintiff)

v

LOGAN CITY COUNCIL
(defendant)

FILE NO/S:

D143/2016

DIVISION:

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

17 February 2016

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

29 January 2016

JUDGE:

McGill SC, DCJ

ORDER:

Order the defendant to provide certain information in accordance with these reasons.  Application otherwise dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

EMPLOYMENT LAW – Injury to employee – Liability of employer – pre-litigation procedure – obligation to provide information reasonably requested – scope of obligation – whether requests reasonable. 

Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 s 279(1)(b).

Angus v Conelius [2008] 1 Qd R 101 – cited.
Cross v Queensland Rugby Football Union Ltd [2001] QSC 173 – cited.
Doupain v JBS Australia Pty Ltd (Townsville D361/2012, 14/12/12, Baulch DCJ, unreported) – followed.
Dwyer v Framemaster (Qld) Pty Ltd [2013] QDC 150 – cited.
Gitsham v Suncorp Metway Insurance Limited [2003] 2 Qd R 251 – cited.
Haug v Jupiters Ltd [2008] 1 Qd R 276 – cited.
McGuire v Woolworths Limited (S9924/2009, 25/9/09, P Lyons J, unreported) – not followed.
N B Hayward Pty Ltd v Thomas [2014] QDC 147 – followed.
R v Wallace (1949) 78 CLR 529 – cited.
RACQ-GIO Insurance Ltd v Ogilvie [2002] 1 Qd R 536 – cited.
Ranger v Suncorp [1999] 2 Qd R 433 – cited.
RSL (Qld) War Veterans Homes Ltd v Palma [2010] QSC 222 – followed.
Suncorp Metway Insurance Ltd v Brown [2005] 1 Qd R 204 – considered.
Suncorp Metway Insurance Ltd v Hill [2004] 2 Qd R 681 – cited.

COUNSEL:

G J Cross for the plaintiff
W D P Campbell for the defendant

SOLICITORS:

Patinos personal lawyers for the plaintiff
Jensen McConaghy for the defendant

1. This is an application under the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (“the Act”) s 287 for the defendant to comply with its obligation under s 279 to provide information. A very detailed request for information was made by the solicitors for the plaintiff to the solicitors for the defendant on 26 October 2015. The plaintiff says that the information has never been provided, and seeks the information. Eighteen questions were referred to in the Scott Schedule handed up at the hearing, but questions 1 and 17 were not pressed. The application is resisted. The first issue is as to the scope of the obligation on a party under s 279(1) of the Act.

1. Section 279 provides as follows:

(1)   The parties must cooperate in relation to a claim, in particular by—

(a) giving each other copies of relevant documents about—

(i)          the circumstances of the event resulting in the injury; and

(ii)         the worker's injury; and

(iii)        the worker's prospects of rehabilitation; and

(b) giving information reasonably requested by each other party about—

(i)          the circumstances of the event resulting in the injury; and

(ii)         the nature of the injury and of any impairment or financial loss resulting from the injury; and