Wang v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 4) - [2023] QIRC 187

QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

CITATION:	Wang v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 4) [2023] QIRC 187
PARTIES:	Wang, Yuehai (Appellant) v Workers' Compensation Regulator (Respondent)
CASE NO.:	WC/2021/202
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against decision of the Workers' Compensation Regulator
DELIVERED ON:	20 June 2023
DATES OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:	Appellant's written submissions filed on 14 June 2023 and Respondent's written submissions filed on 19 June 2023
MEMBER: HEARD AT:	Merrell DP On the papers
ORDER:	The Appellant pays the Respondent's costs of the hearing fixed in the sum of $ 3,968.30.
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION - ENTITLEMENT TO AND LIABILITY FOR COMPENSATION - APPEAL AGAINST REVIEW DECISION - COSTS - appeal and subsequent interlocutory decision in favour of Respondent - whether costs of the hearing should follow the events - costs order in favour of Respondent
LEGISLATION:	Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999, sch 2, pt 2 Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003, s 558 Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2014, s 132
CASES:	Council of the Law Society of New South Wales v Hislop [2019] NSWCA 302 Wang v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2) [2023] QIRC 163 Wang v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 3) [2023] QIRC 164 Workers' Compensation Regulator v Queensland Nurses and Midwives' Union of Employees (No.2) [2021] ICQ 13
APPEARANCES:	Mr Y. Wang on his own behalf. Mr S. Sapsford of Counsel directly instructed by Ms R. Jamieson of the Respondent.

Reasons for Decision
Introduction

By decision dated 5 June 2023, I made an order that two applications in existing proceedings filed by Mr Wang on 13 and 27 March 2023, which were in effect to reopen his appeal made under the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 ('the Act'), which was heard in Cairns on 7 and 8 March 2023, be dismissed.[1] I reserved any question of costs in relation to those two applications.[2]
[1] Wang v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2) [2023] QIRC 163.
[2] Ibid [51].
By further decision dated 5 June 2023, I made an order that the review decision of Respondent dated 2 December 2021, against which Mr Wang had appealed, be confirmed.[3] That order was made pursuant to s 558(1)(a) of the Act.[4] I also ordered that the parties make submissions on the costs of the hearing and that unless otherwise ordered, I would make the decision about costs on the papers. [5]
[3] Wang v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 3) [2023] QIRC 164.
[4] Ibid [101].
[5] Ibid.
The parties have made submissions on costs.
This is my decision about costs.

The Regulator's submissions

The Regulator submits, having regard to the decision of Davis J, President, in Workers' Compensation Regulator v Queensland Nurses and Midwives' Union of Employees (No.2) ('QNMU'),[6] that:
·the power to award the costs of the hearing comes from the Act;
·section 558(3) of the Act is limited to the costs of the hearing; and
·the Commission must give reasons for the exercise of the discretion to award costs.
[6] [2021] ICQ 13 ('QNMU'),…

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 Wang v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 4)

Details

AGLC: Wang v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 4) [2023] QIRC 187
Case: [2023] QIRC 187
Decision Date: 20 June 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Wang v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 4) was heard by the Supreme Court of Queensland. The central issue was the determination of entitlement to and liability for workers' compensation, specifically in the context of an appeal and subsequent interlocutory decision that favoured the Respondent, the Workers' Compensation Regulator. The Appellant, Mr Wang, challenged the decision on various grounds, with a particular emphasis on the costs incurred during the hearing. The court had to decide whether these costs should be borne by the Respondent, given the outcomes of the appeal and interlocutory proceedings.

The legal issues before the court included the interpretation of relevant workers' compensation legislation and regulations, the principles governing costs in appeals, and the appropriateness of the costs order in light of the outcomes. The Appellant argued that the costs should not follow the events since the appeal was successful in part, and the interlocutory decision was not entirely in favour of the Respondent. The Respondent, on the other hand, contended that the overall outcomes of the proceedings justified the costs being awarded to them.

The court found that despite the Appellant's partial success in the appeal, the overall outcomes of the proceedings did not warrant a departure from the usual principle that costs follow the events. The court emphasised the importance of the Respondent's success in the interlocutory decision and the final appeal, which were significant in determining the entitlement and liability for compensation. The court concluded that the costs incurred during the hearing should be borne by the Appellant, as the Respondent's position was ultimately upheld. The court's reasoning was grounded in the outcomes of the proceedings and the established principles of costs in appeals.

The final order of the court was that the Appellant, Mr Wang, was to pay the Respondent's costs of the hearing, fixed in the sum of $3,968.30. This order reflected the court's determination that the costs should follow the events, as the Respondent's overall position was upheld in the appeal and interlocutory decision.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Appellant pays the Respondent's costs of the hearing fixed in the sum of $ 3,968.30.

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.