INDUSTRIAL COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: PARTIES:
FILE NO: PROCEEDING: DELIVERED ON:
Turay v Workers’ Compensation Regulator [2023] ICQ 13
SUSAN BALLU TURAY
(appellant)
v
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION REGULATOR
(respondent) C/2023/4
Appeal
16 June 2023
HEARING DATE: 24 May 2023
MEMBER: Davis J, President
ORDER: Appeal dismissed
CATCHWORDS: APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – RIGHT OF APPEAL –
SCOPE AND EFFECT OF APPEAL – where WorkCover made a decision adverse to the appellant – where the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (WCR Act) provided for a right of review of that decision to the respondent
– where the respondent affirmed the decision – where the WCR Act provided for an appeal to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission (QIRC) from the decision of the respondent – where the appellant appealed to the QIRC – where the QIRC dismissed her appeal – where the appellant appealed to the Industrial Court of Queensland – where the WCR Act provided for the appeal to be “by way of rehearing”
– where the Industrial Relations Act 2016 (IR Act) provided for appeals from the QIRC to the Industrial Court of Queensland – where the IR Act provided for appeals on grounds limited to errors of law or excess or want of jurisdiction – whether an appeal from the QIRC to the Industrial Court of Queensland against a decision made under the WCR Act is limited to errors of law or excess or want of jurisdiction
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – INTERFERENCE WITH DISCRETION OF COURT BELOW – INTERFERENCE WITH JUDGE’S
FINDINGS OF FACT – where the appellant lodged a claim for workers’ compensation under the WCR Act – where the application was lodged out of time – where WorkCover had a discretion to waive the time limit – where the discretion arose if the appellant had reasonable cause for not lodging the application within time – where WorkCover did not waive the breach of the time limit – where the appellant sought review of the decision of the respondent – where the respondent upheld
the decision of WorkCover – where the appellant appealed the respondent’s decision to the QIRC – where the QIRC heard the matter de novo – where the QIRC dismissed the appellant’s appeal – where the appellant appealed to the Industrial Court of Queensland – where the appeal was one by way of rehearing
– whether the findings of fact by the QIRC were open and properly made – whether the inferences drawn by the QIRC were open and properly drawn – whether the discretion to find that there was no reasonable cause was infected by error
Acts Interpretation Act 1954, s 36
Electrical Safety and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2011 Electrical Safety and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
Industrial Relations Act 1999, s 332, s 341, s 345, s 346,
s 347, s 348, s 349
Industrial Relations Act 2016, s 3, s 7, s 407, s 429, s 503,
s 554, s…
Continue reading Turay v Workers' Compensation Regulator
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Turay v Workers' Compensation Regulator [2023] ICQ 13
- Case
- [2023] ICQ 13
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues in this case revolved around the scope and effect of an appeal from the QIRC to the Industrial Court of Queensland, particularly whether such an appeal against a decision made under the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 is limited to errors of law or excess or want of jurisdiction. Another issue was whether the findings of fact by the QIRC were open and properly made, whether the inferences drawn by the QIRC were open and properly drawn, and whether the discretion to find that there was no reasonable cause was infected by error.
The court found that the appeal from the QIRC to the Industrial Court of Queensland against a decision made under the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 was not limited to errors of law or excess or want of jurisdiction. The court held that the findings of fact by the QIRC were open and properly made, the inferences drawn by the QIRC were open and properly drawn, and there was no error in the exercise of the discretion to find that there was no reasonable cause. The appeal was dismissed.
The final orders were that the appeal was dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal dismissed
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
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.