State of Queensland (Department of Transport and Main Roads) v Simon Blackwood (Workers' Compensation Regulator)

[2014] QIRC 26

QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

CITATION:	State of Queensland (Department of Transport and
Main Roads) v Simon Blackwood (Workers'
Compensation Regulator) [2014] QIRC 026
PARTIES:	State of Queensland (Department of Transport
and Main Roads)
(Appellant)
v
Simon Blackwood (Workers' Compensation Regulator)
(Respondent)
CASE NO:	WC/2013/406
PROCEEDING:	Application setting aside attendance notice
DELIVERED ON:	31 January 2014
HEARING DATE:	31 January 2014
MEMBER:	Deputy President Swan
ORDERS :	1.  The Regulator to make application to the

Commission for further disclosure.

2.      The Regulator is to pay the costs of the application to the Appellant.

CASES:	Industrial Relations (Tribunal) Rules 2011, Rule 61
APPEARANCES:	Dr M. Spry, Counsel instructed by Crown Law for the Appellant. Mr F. Lippett, Counsel directly instructed by Simon Blackwood (Workers' Compensation Regulator), the Respondent.

REPORT ON DECISION (as edited)

In giving her decision from the Bench on 31 January 2014, Deputy President Swan stated,

"This interim decision relates to the matter of the Department of Transport and Main Roads and the Regulator, matter number WC/2013/333.

A further Directions Order, issued from the Commission on 24 October 2013 with regard to this matter. Inter alia, at point 3, that Directions Order stated that:

"The Appellants supply to Q-COMP by 4 pm on 19 December 2013 copies of those documents contained in the list disclosed, which Q-COMP requests, and for which the Appellant has no legal claim to privilege. Copies of documents already provided to Q-COMP in the review or appeal process need not be further copied and provided to Q-COMP pursuant to this direction."

On 25 November 2013, the Regulator filed an Attendance Notice to Produce, which set out, in dot points, five matters which it required the Crown, acting for the Department of Transport and Main Roads, to produce.

The Crown requests that the Notice to Produce be set aside as an abuse of process.

The Notice to Produce was filed well before the Crown has its obligations under the Directions Order to produce certain documents. The Crown has also added that there has been no complaint made by the Regulator with regard to the disclosure it undertook in response to the Directions Order of 24 October 2013.

The reasons put by the Regulator for filing its Notice to Produce, amongst other things, is because of some other problems it faced in a matter entirely separate and discrete from this matter.

The Regulator concedes that it could have been more specific in terms of what it claimed under the Notice to Produce, however it says that matter could be easily rectified.

After considering the submissions of the parties, I determine that the Attendance Notice to Produce be set aside. There is a Directions Order in place which has been complied with by the Crown. If now the Regulator has complaint with the Crown's compliance with that Directions Order and believes that it doesn't have, in its possession, all of the material it requires for the purpose of this case, then it is open to the Regulator to make an application to the Commission for further and better disclosure.

The Regulator is to pay the Appellant the costs of and incidental to this application.

I order accordingly."