Queensland Judgments
Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
  • sclq logo
  1. Caselaw
  2. QIRC
  3. 2018
  4. Lindores Construction Logistics Pty Ltd v The regulator under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 - [2018] QIRC 8

Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
  • Unreported Judgment

Lindores Construction Logistics Pty Ltd v The regulator under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011[2018] QIRC 8

Lindores Construction Logistics Pty Ltd v The regulator under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011[2018] QIRC 8

QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

CITATION:

Lindores Construction Logistics Pty Ltd v The regulator under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 [2018] QIRC 008

PARTIES:

Lindores Construction Logistics Pty Ltd

(applicant)

v

The regulator under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011

(respondent)

CASE NO:

WHS/2018/12

PROCEEDING:

Review by commission

DELIVERED ON:

30 January 2018

HEARING DATES:

On the papers

MEMBERS:

Deputy President O'Connor

ORDERS:

  1. The decision of the regulator under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 is set aside.
  2. The issue is returned to the decision-maker for an internal review to be conducted.
  3. The decision-maker must make the decision within fourteen days of this decision being received.

CATCHWORDS:

WORK HEALTH AND SAFETY LAW – application for external review – where internal review taken to confirm decision – issue returned to decision-maker for internal review

LEGISLATION:

CASES:

Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) s 223, s 226, s 229, s 229A, s 229D, s 229E, Schedule 2A

Da Costa v Cockburn Salvage & Trading Pty Ltd (1970) 124 CLR 192

Reasons for Decision

  1. [1]
    The applicant in this matter, Lindores Construction Logistics Pty Ltd, seeks an external review of a decision of the respondent.
  1. [2]
    On 23 January 2018 an application was filed in the industrial registry seeking to revoke a prohibition notice on the grounds that it was issued in error and that the application for internal review of the prohibition notice was misplaced and expired before being acted on.
  1. [3]
    By reason of an administrative oversight by the regulator no internal review was undertaken within 14 days after the application for internal review was received.
  1. [4]
    Section 226(1) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) requires that the "internal reviewer must review the reviewable decision and make a decision as soon as is reasonably practicable and within 14 days after the application for internal review is received."
  1. [5]
    As a consequence of the oversight, s 226(6) was engaged and the decision subject to the internal review was "taken to have been confirmed by the internal reviewer."
  1. [6]
    It is not in dispute that the decision by the inspector to issue a prohibition notice under s 195 the Act is a reviewable decision for the purposes of Schedule 2A of the Act. The external review of s 195 decision falls within the jurisdiction of this Commission.
  1. [7]
    Section 229D of the Act outlines the procedure for hearing reviews before the Commission. Specifically, s 229D(2) states that an application for a review is to be dealt with by way of rehearing, unaffected by the decision. In Da Costa v Cockburn Salvage & Trading Pty Ltd, Windeyer J, in summarising a decision of Dixon J's, wrote that:

"His Honour's observations there shew that, in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, this Court has full authority to decide whether a judgment of the court  below ought or ought not to have been given on the evidence before it seen in the light of the law as it then stood. Such an appeal on both fact and law, although limited to the material before the court below, may be conveniently called a re-hearing,…"[1]

  1. [8]
    It follows that the task of the commission in this review is to decide whether the decision of the decision maker below should or should not have been made on the evidence before it seen in the light of the law as it then stood.
  2. [9]
    As a consequence of the automatic confirmation of the inspector's decision, the commission does not have the benefit of any of the material or information upon which the inspector relied to issue the prohibition notice. Moreover, the content of the application is also of little assistance and contains none of the material facts relied upon.
  1. [10]
    In the circumstances, it seems that the appropriate course to adopt is to set aside the internal review decision and remit the issue back to the regulator to permit an internal review to be conducted. 

Order

  1. The decision of the regulator under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 is set aside.
  2. The issue is returned to the decision-maker for an internal review to be conducted.
  3. The decision-maker must make the decision within fourteen days of this decision being received.

Footnotes

[1] Da Costa v Cockburn Salvage & Trading Pty Ltd (1970) 124 CLR 192, 208.

Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    Lindores Construction Logistics Pty Ltd v The regulator under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011

  • Shortened Case Name:

    Lindores Construction Logistics Pty Ltd v The regulator under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011

  • MNC:

    [2018] QIRC 8

  • Court:

    QIRC

  • Judge(s):

    Member Deputy President O'Connor

  • Date:

    30 Jan 2018

Appeal Status

Please note, appeal data is presently unavailable for this judgment. This judgment may have been the subject of an appeal.

Cases Cited

Case NameFull CitationFrequency
Da Costa v Cockburn Salvage & Trading Pty Ltd (1970) 124 CLR 192
2 citations
Jump To
Cite 1 - (1970) 124 CLR 192
Cite 2 - (1970) 124 CLR 192

Cases Citing

Case NameFull CitationFrequency
Gomez v State of Queensland (Department of Agriculture and Fisheries) [2024] QIRC 1901 citation
1

Require Technical Assistance?

Message sent!

Thanks for reaching out! Someone from our team will get back to you soon.

Message not sent!

Something went wrong. Please try again.