Jackson v Coal Resources of Queensland Ltd

99.265

COURT OF APPEAL

de JERSEY CJ
McPHERSON JA

WHITE J

Appeal No 3262 of 1999

MARK KEVIN JACKSON	Appellant (Plaintiff)
and
COAL RESOURCES OF QUEENSLAND
LIMITED	Respondent (Defendant)
BRISBANE

..DATE 15/07/99
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The appellant appeals against a judgment rejecting his

claim for damages on the basis that he had failed to establish negligence or breach of

duty on the part of the respondent as his employer.

I will not comment on the merit of the appeal save to observe that in my view there

is nothing in the reasons for judgment which would encourage an approach on this

application especially accommodating to the appellant as the respondent to the

application for security for costs.

The material shows sufficiently to my mind that if the appellant fails on the appeal, he

will not be able to meet a costs order against him. The circumstance that his

impecuniosity may have been a substantial result of the accident has diminished

significance at this appeal level by contrast with its arguable significance at first

instance.

There is no discretionary reason why security for costs should not be ordered. The

amount sought is $10,920. I would exclude the costs of this application and make a

substantial further adjustment to reflect doubt whether the fees of senior counsel

would be allowed.

I would set the amount to be ordered for security at $5500. I would order that the

appellant furnish to the Registrar as security for the respondent's costs of the appeal

by 4 p.m. on 29 July 1999 the amount of or property to the value of $5500 in such

form as the Registrar may require whether by payment of money or otherwise and

that failing the furnishing of such security by that time the appeal stand dismissed

without further order.
I would order that the costs of this application be costs in the cause.

...

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The order I mentioned before should read

"The appeal stand dismissed with costs without further order."

...

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: I will read it out again. Order - and I sense from the

reaction of my colleagues - that this is the order of the Court.

Order that the appellant furnish to the Registrar as security for the respondent's

costs of the appeal the amount of $5500 or property to the value of $5500 by 4

p.m. on 29 July 1999 in such form as the Registrar may require, whether by

payment of money or otherwise, and that failing the furnishing of such security by

that time the appeal stand dismissed with costs without further order. Costs of this

application to be costs in the appeal. That is the order of the Court.

-----

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal in Jackson v Coal Resources of Queensland Ltd involved the appellant, Mark Kevin Jackson, challenging a lower court's judgment that dismissed his claim for damages against his former employer, Coal Resources of Queensland Limited. Jackson sought compensation for injuries he sustained during his employment, alleging negligence and breach of duty on the part of the respondent. The Court of Appeal heard Jackson's appeal, focusing on whether he had adequately established the respondent's liability for his injuries.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal centred on whether the trial judge's findings were sufficient to support the dismissal of Jackson's claim and whether the appellant had a realistic prospect of success on appeal. The court also had to consider the financial implications for Jackson, particularly his impecuniosity, and determine whether security for costs was warranted. The court needed to balance the respondent's right to protect its interests against the appellant's ability to pursue his claim.

In its reasoning, the Court of Appeal found that the lower court's judgment adequately addressed the merits of Jackson's claim and that there was little to suggest that the appeal would be successful. The court emphasised that Jackson's financial circumstances, which may have influenced the lower court's decision, were of diminished relevance at the appeal stage. The court determined that Jackson would likely be unable to meet a costs order if the appeal failed, thus justifying the imposition of security for costs. The court set the amount of security at $5500, adjusted to account for potential disallowance of senior counsel's fees, and ordered that this amount be provided by a specified deadline. Failure to comply would result in the dismissal of the appeal with costs.

The final orders of the Court of Appeal required Jackson to furnish security for the respondent's costs of the appeal in the amount of $5500 by 4 p.m. on 29 July 1999. The court also ruled that the costs of the security for costs application would be costs in the appeal. The appeal was to stand dismissed with costs if the required security was not provided by the specified deadline.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established