Chapman-Davis v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2015] NSWIC 13

Chapman-Davis v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2015] NSWIC 13

The applicant was a 'paramedic' within the statutory meaning at the time of injury, entitling her to declaratory relief; however, as the original application contained deficiencies and some claims were abandoned or had no utility, it is just to apportion costs so that respondents pay 80% of her costs, reflecting both overall success and time unnecessarily expended.

Parties
Applicant: Lorelle Chapman-Davis; First Respondent: State of New South Wales; Second Respondent: QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited, as an agent for NSW Self Insurance Corporation
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Industrial Relations/declaratory and Costs Proceedings / Post Substantive Judgment; Determination of Final Orders and Costs
Outcome
Applicant substantially successful; declaration granted and costs apportioned.
Legal Topics
Declaratory Relief, Apportionment of Costs, Employment Status Under Statute, Test Case Principles, Judicial Discretion on Costs
Industrial Law Workers Compensation Civil Procedure Declaratory Relief Apportionment of Costs Employment Status Under Statute Test Case Principles Judicial Discretion on Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lorelle Chapman-Davis

Applicant

State of New South Wales

First Respondent

QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited, as an agent for NSW Self Insurance Corporation

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Relations/declaratory and Costs Proceedings / Post Substantive Judgment; Determination of Final Orders and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant was a 'paramedic' within the meaning of cl 25 of Pt 19H of Sch 6 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 at time of injury
  2. 2 Proper apportionment of costs given the conduct of proceedings, including abandoned and unsuccessful claims
  3. 3 Role of both respondents in costs liability

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was a 'paramedic' within the statutory meaning at the time of injury, entitling her to declaratory relief; however, as the original application contained deficiencies and some claims were abandoned or had no utility, it is just to apportion costs so that respondents pay 80% of her costs, reflecting both overall success and time unnecessarily expended.

Court Disposition

Applicant substantially successful; declaration granted and costs apportioned.

Orders

  • At the time of her injury on 25 July 2011 the applicant was a 'paramedic' within the meaning and for the purposes of cl 25 of Pt 19H of Sch 6 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.
  • The respondents shall pay 80 per cent of the applicant's costs of these proceedings, as agreed or assessed.