Baigorri v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2)
[2023] QIRC 201
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Baigorri v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2)[2023] QIRC 201
- Add to List
Baigorri v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2)[2023] QIRC 201
Baigorri v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2)[2023] QIRC 201
QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION
CITATION: | Baigorri v Workers' Compensation Regulator (No. 2) [2023] QIRC 201 |
PARTIES: | Baigorri, Horacio Augusto (Appellant) v Workers' Compensation Regulator (Respondent) |
CASE NO: | WC/2021/204 |
PROCEEDING: | Appeal against decision of Workers' Compensation Regulator |
DELIVERED ON: | 11 July 2023 |
DATES OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: | Respondent's written submissions filed on 10 July 2023 |
MEMBER: | Merrell DP |
HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
ORDER: |
|
CATCHWORDS: | WORKERS' COMPENSATION – ENTITLEMENT TO COMPENSATION – PERSONS ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION – COSTS – appeal decision in favour of Respondent – whether costs of the hearing should follow the event – costs order in favour of Respondent |
LEGISLATION: | Uniform Civil Procedure (Fees) Regulation 2019, s 24 Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003, s 558 Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2014, s 132 |
CASES: | Baigorri v Workers' Compensation Regulator [2023] QIRC 190 Workers' Compensation Regulator v Queensland Nurses and Midwives' Union of Employees (No.2) [2021] ICQ 13 |
APPEARANCES: | Mr P. O'Neill of Counsel directly instructed by Ms C. Shedden of the Respondent. |
Reasons for Decision
Introduction
- [1]
- [2]Only the Respondent has filed submissions on costs.
- [3]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'),[3] that:
- the power to award the costs of the hearing comes from the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 ('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.
- [4]Those submissions are correct.
- [5]The decision in QNMU is also authority for the proposition that, having regard to the power to award costs under s 558(3) of the Act, costs ought ordinarily follow the event.[4]
- [6]In the present case, the Respondent was wholly successful. There is no reason why the Appellant should not pay the Respondent's costs.
- [7]Having regard to scale C under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999, schedule 2, part 2, as it applied as at 8 February 2023, the Respondent applies for the following itemised costs:
- Item 8 (f), Counsel's fee to appear at hearing – 8 February 2023: $1,686.00;
- Item 10(b), attendance of clerk – 8 February 2023: $306.75;
- Item 13(a)(i), Disclosure – requesting: $365.90; and
- Item 13(a)(ii), Disclosure – making: $660.85.
- [8]The Respondent also applies for the attendance allowance, provided for in s 24(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure (Fees) Regulation 2019, for its lay witness, in the amount of $86.55. Such an allowance is a cost that may be allowed.[5]
- [9]The Regulator seeks an order that Mr Baigorri pay its costs of the hearing, fixed in the amount of $3,106.05.
- [10]Having regard to Mr Baigorri's appeal, the itemised costs sought by the Regulator are reasonable.
Order
- [11]I make the following order:
The Appellant pays the Respondent's costs fixed in the amount of $3,106.05.