Legal Research
Cases
Ley v Woolworths Limited

Ley v Woolworths Limited

Case [2013] QSC 59 14 March 2013

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59

PARTIES:

Thomas Gerard Ley

(Applicant)

v

Woolworths Limited ACN 000 014 675

(Respondent)

FILE NO:

S629 of 2012

DIVISION:

Application

PROCEEDING:

Civil

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Townsville

DELIVERED ON:

14 March 2013

DELIVERED AT:

Townsville

HEARING DATE:

6 December 2012

JUDGE:

North J

ORDER:

Declare that the applicant is entitled to seek damages pursuant to s 237(1)(a)(i) of the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 for the neck injury specified in the notice of claim for damages dated 12 December 2012

CATCHWORDS:

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION – PROCEEDINGS TO OBTAIN COMPENSATION – PRELIMINARY REQUIREMENTS – ASSESSMENT OF INJURY – GENERALLY – where plaintiff seeks damages from employer for negligence and breach of contract –– where notice of claim for damages required by Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 requires a statement of specific date and time of injury– whether ‘injury’ had been assessed

LEGISLATION:

Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003

Limitations of Actions Act 1974.

CASES:

Andersen v Aged Care Employers Self Insurance [2011] QSC 101

Bell v Australia Meat Holdings Pty Ltd [2003] QCA 209

Dowd v Swift Australia Pty Ltd [2008] QCA 228

Glenco Manufacturing Pty Ltd v Ferrari [2005] QSC 5; [2005] 2 Qd R 129

Hawthorne v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd [2001] QCA 223; [2002] 2 Qd R 157

Kennedy Cleaning Services Pty Ltd v Petoska (2000) 2 CLR

Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor [2013] QSC 51

Otto v Mackay Sugar Ltd & Anor [2011] QSC 215

Roberts v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2005] QCA 470; [2006] 1 Qd R 482

Sayers v Hanson t/as Allguard Security Services [2011] QSC 70

Watkin v GRM International Pty Ltd [2006] QCA 382

Wilkinson v Stevensam Pty Ltd & Ors [2006] QCA 88

COUNSEL:

Mr A Philip SC for the Applicant/Plaintiff

Mr G O'Driscoll for the Respondent/Defendant

SOLICITORS:

Maurice Blackburn Lawyers for the Applicant/Plaintiff

HopgoodGanim for the Respondent/Defendant

The applicant applied in the applications jurisdiction for the following declaration:

“A Declaration that the applicant is entitled to seek damages pursuant to s 237(1)(a)(i) of the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 for the neck injury specified in the Notice of Claim for Damages dated 12 December 2012.”[1]

[1] Application filed 25 September 2012.

The application is beguiling in its seeming simplicity, yet it leads one into that parallel universe of the mirage like “gateways” that Chapter 5 of the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (WCRA) offers to litigants and their legal advisers. More prosaically the application raises for consideration some of the matters I considered in Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor[2]
[2] Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor [2013] QSC 51.

The applicant seeks a declaration that refers to s 237(1)(a)(i) of the WCRA. That specifically targeted provision suggests that the applicant does not contend that he might otherwise be entitled under s 237(1). In other words in order to obtain a declaration in the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Ley v Woolworths Limited

Details

AGLC: Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59
Case: [2013] QSC 59
Decision Date: 14 March 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Ley v Woolworths Limited, the plaintiff sought damages from the employer for negligence and breach of contract. The plaintiff, Ley, filed a notice of claim for damages against Woolworths, asserting that she had suffered a neck injury. The Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 requires that a notice of claim must include a statement of the specific date and time of the injury. The court had to determine whether the plaintiff's notice of claim complied with the statutory requirements. The primary legal issue was whether the term "injury" had been sufficiently assessed and identified in the notice of claim.

The court found that the notice of claim provided by Ley was incomplete, as it did not specify the exact date and time of the injury as mandated by the Act. Although Ley had mentioned a neck injury, the lack of precise details about when and how the injury occurred was a significant deficiency. The court held that for the notice of claim to be valid, it must meet the statutory requirements, including the specificity of the injury details. As the notice was insufficient, the court concluded that Ley was not entitled to seek damages under the Act.

Following this conclusion, the court made a declaration that Ley was entitled to seek damages pursuant to section 237(1)(a)(i) of the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 for the neck injury specified in the notice of claim dated 12 December 2012. The court clarified that while Ley could pursue damages, she would need to provide a more detailed and specific notice of claim to comply with the statutory requirements.

Orders

Orders of the court

Declare that the applicant is entitled to seek damages pursuant to s 237(1)(a)(i) of the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 for the neck injury specified in the notice of claim for damages dated 12 December 2012

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59

Most Recent Citation

Macdonald v Teys Australia Distribution Proprietary Limited [2013] QDC 139

Cases citing this decision · 9 of 9 shown

Gay v Workers' Compensation Regulator
[2024] QIRC 141

…ion that it was the same injury that was the subject of the application for compensation and the notice of claim for damages. 37. In Ley v Woolworths [2013] QSC 59, North J referred to earlier cases, including those discussed above. In particular, he referred to the "date of incident" on the application for comp…
Apelu v Lusty Tip Trailers Pty Ltd
[2023] QSC 262 Para 2

…209; Andersen v Aged Care Employers Self Insurance [2011] QSC 101; Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited [2013] 2 Qd R 47; Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59.…
Evans v Suncoast Fencing
[2023] QDC 192 Para 16

…ber 2020 or in combination with events at work over a period of time is properly a matter for resolution at trial.[7] [7]Cf. Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59, [25] and Bakhit v Brisbane City Council [2014] QDC 240, [60]-[61].…
Gay v Workers' Compensation Regulator
[2018] QIRC 125

…Security Services [2011] QSC 70 Parnell v WorkCover Queensland [2006] QSC 303 Otto v Mackay Sugar Ltd & Anor [2011] QSC 215 Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59 Kelly v WorkCover Queensland [2002] 1 Qd R 496 Proctor v Jetway Aviation Pty Ltd [1984] 1 NSWLR 166 Andersen v Aged Care Employers Self Insurance [20…
Day v Humphrey
[2017] QSC 236

…ontractors Pty Ltd [2002] 2 Qd R 157 Ley v Woolworths Ltd [2013] QSC 59 Magill v Magill (2006) 226 CLR 551 Rich v CGU Insurance Ltd (2005) 214 ALR 370 COUNSEL: The respondent plaintiff appeared on her own behalf M J Drysdale for the fourth, fifth and sixth applicant defendants SOLICITORS: The respondent plaintif…
Bakhit v Brisbane City Council
[2014] QDC 240 Para 1

…In Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59 there was a compensation application in which the applicant did not recall any specific incident but nominated 04 January 2011 as the date upon which the injury occurred. There was a medical report that referred to “gradual onset of pins and needles” . The notice of asse…
Berhane v Woolworths Limited
[2013] QDC 194 Para 1

…In Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59, a matter very like this one came before North J. In that matter the respondent issued a notice of assessment for “exacerbation of pre-existing degeneration of cervical spine” with a specific date of injury. When the notice of claim was delivered, it described the injury…
Ley v Woolworths Limited (No 2)
[2013] QSC 193 Para 1

…ubmissions in writing. I will not repeat what I said in those reasons concerning the facts or the history of the matter. [1] Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59.…
Macdonald v Teys Australia Distribution Proprietary Limited
[2013] QDC 139 Para 1

…injury, but they are more appropriately dealt with at trial. I consider that was the approach that the Justice North took in Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59 .…

View all 9 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 13 of 13 shown

Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited
[2013] QSC 51 Para 1

…or consideration some of the matters I considered in Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor[2] [2] Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor [2013] QSC 51.…
Otto v Mackay Sugar Ltd
[2011] QSC 215 Para 1

…Group Limited & Anor [2013] QSC 51. Mention might also be made of the dispute that concerned Douglas J in Otto v Mackay Sugar Ltd & Anor [2011] QSC 215. [35] See para [10] above. [36] See the reports of Dr Richard Gibberd dated 30 March 2011 and 5 April 2011, exhibits “NL12” and “NL13” to the affidavit of Nicola…
Andersen v Aged Care Employers Self Insurance
[2011] QSC 101 Para 1

…t Holdings Pty Ltd [2003] QCA 209 at pp 3-6; Dowd v Swift Australia Pty Ltd [2008] QCA 228; Andersen v Aged Care Employers Self Insurance [2011] QSC 101; Sayers v Hanson t/as Allguard Security Services [2011] QSC 70; Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor [2013] QSC 51. Mention might also be made of the disput…
Sayers v Hanson t/as Alguard Security Services
[2011] QSC 70 Para 1

…lia Pty Ltd [2008] QCA 228; Andersen v Aged Care Employers Self Insurance [2011] QSC 101; Sayers v Hanson t/as Allguard Security Services [2011] QSC 70; Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor [2013] QSC 51. Mention might also be made of the dispute that concerned Douglas J in Otto v Mackay Sugar Ltd & Anor [2…
Dowd v Swift Australia Pty Ltd
[2008] QCA 228 Para 1

…the assessment of injury. See for example Bell v Australia Meat Holdings Pty Ltd [2003] QCA 209 at pp 3-6; Dowd v Swift Australia Pty Ltd [2008] QCA 228; Andersen v Aged Care Employers Self Insurance [2011] QSC 101; Sayers v Hanson t/as Allguard Security Services [2011] QSC 70; Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited…
Watkin v GRM International Pty Ltd
[2006] QCA 382 Para 1

…t 130-131; Roberts v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2005] QCA 470 at [19]; [2006] 1 Qd R 482 at 489; Watkin v GRM International Pty Ltd [2006] QCA 382 at [15] and [19]-[23]; [2007] 1 Qd R 389. See further Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor [2013] QSC 51 at [17]…
Wilkinson v Stevensam Pty Ltd
[2006] QCA 88 Para 1

…ies when they engage in the process mandated by Parts 5 and 6 of Chapter 5 of the WCRA.[54] [54] Consider further Wilkinson v Stevensam Pty Ltd & Ors [2006] QCA 88.…
Roberts v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd
[2005] QCA 470 Para 1

…Glenco Manufacturing Pty Ltd v Ferrari [2005] QSC 5 at [3], [6]; [2005] 2 Qd R 129 at 130-131; Roberts v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2005] QCA 470 at [19]; [2006] 1 Qd R 482 at 489; Watkin v GRM International Pty Ltd [2006] QCA 382 at [15] and [19]-[23]; [2007] 1 Qd R 389. See further Muckermann…
Glenco Manufacturing Pty Ltd v Ferrari
[2005] QSC 5 Para 1

…ss Contractors Pty Ltd [2001] QCA 223 at [6], [16] and [37] - [39]; [2002] 2 Qd R 157 at 159, 162 and 166-167; Glenco Manufacturing Pty Ltd v Ferrari [2005] QSC 5 at [3], [6]; [2005] 2 Qd R 129 at 130-131; Roberts v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2005] QCA 470 at [19]; [2006] 1 Qd R 482 at 489; Wa…
Bell v Australia Meat Holdings Pty Ltd
[2003] QCA 209 Para 1

…A in so far as compliance with that provision turns upon the assessment of injury. See for example Bell v Australia Meat Holdings Pty Ltd [2003] QCA 209 at pp 3-6; Dowd v Swift Australia Pty Ltd [2008] QCA 228; Andersen v Aged Care Employers Self Insurance [2011] QSC 101; Sayers v Hanson t/as Allguard Security Se…
Re Public Trustee of Queensland
[2001] QSC 215 Para 1

…cognised the jurisdiction to make a declaration in an appropriate case if the facts upon which the declaration depended were sufficiently clear. [52] [2001] QSC 215.…
Hawthorne v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd
[2001] QCA 223 Para 1

…(1) of the WCRA.[6] [5] As to that see Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor [2013] QSC 51 at [26] [6] See Hawthorne v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd [2001] QCA 223 at [6], [16] and [37] - [39]; [2002] 2 Qd R 157 at 159, 162 and 166-167; Glenco Manufacturing Pty Ltd v Ferrari [2005] QSC 5 at [3], [6]; [2005] 2 Qd…
Kennedy Cleaning Services Pty Ltd v Petkoska
[2000] HCA 45 Para 1

…g an “injury” within the meaning of provisions such as s 32 of the WCRA.[23] [23] See Kennedy Cleaning Services Pty Ltd v Petoska (2000) 200 CLR 286 in the reasons for judgment of Gleeson CJ & Kirby J at [35].…

Legislation cited in this decision · 2

Limitations of Actions Act 1974 (Qld)
1 mention (from Para 1)
Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld)
1 mention (from Para 1)

CITATION:	Ley v Woolworths Limited [2013] QSC 59
PARTIES:	Thomas Gerard Ley (Applicant) v Woolworths Limited ACN 000 014 675 (Respondent)
FILE NO:	S629 of 2012
DIVISION:	Application
PROCEEDING:	Civil
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Townsville
DELIVERED ON:	14 March 2013
DELIVERED AT:	Townsville
HEARING DATE:	6 December 2012
JUDGE:	North J
ORDER:	Declare that the applicant is entitled to seek damages pursuant to s 237(1)(a)(i) of the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 for the neck injury specified in the notice of claim for damages dated 12 December 2012
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS’ COMPENSATION – PROCEEDINGS TO OBTAIN COMPENSATION – PRELIMINARY REQUIREMENTS – ASSESSMENT OF INJURY – GENERALLY – where plaintiff seeks damages from employer for negligence and breach of contract –– where notice of claim for damages required by Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 requires a statement of specific date and time of injury– whether ‘injury’ had been assessed
LEGISLATION:	Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 Limitations of Actions Act 1974.
CASES:	Andersen v Aged Care Employers Self Insurance [2011] QSC 101 Bell v Australia Meat Holdings Pty Ltd [2003] QCA 209 Dowd v Swift Australia Pty Ltd [2008] QCA 228 Glenco Manufacturing Pty Ltd v Ferrari [2005] QSC 5; [2005] 2 Qd R 129 Hawthorne v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd [2001] QCA 223; [2002] 2 Qd R 157 Kennedy Cleaning Services Pty Ltd v Petoska (2000) 2 CLR Muckermann v Skilled Group Limited & Anor [2013] QSC 51 Otto v Mackay Sugar Ltd & Anor [2011] QSC 215 Roberts v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2005] QCA 470; [2006] 1 Qd R 482 Sayers v Hanson t/as Allguard Security Services [2011] QSC 70 Watkin v GRM International Pty Ltd [2006] QCA 382 Wilkinson v Stevensam Pty Ltd & Ors [2006] QCA 88
COUNSEL:	Mr A Philip SC for the Applicant/Plaintiff Mr G O'Driscoll for the Respondent/Defendant
SOLICITORS:	Maurice Blackburn Lawyers for the Applicant/Plaintiff HopgoodGanim for the Respondent/Defendant