Anna Petersen v Satcha Tansiri [2001] NSWCC 187

Reported Decision : (2001) 22 NSWCCR 602

Compensation Court of New South Wales

CITATION : Anna Petersen v Satcha Tansiri [2001] NSWCC 187 Anna Petersen PARTIES : Satcha Tansiri Workcover Authority of New South Wales MATTER NUMBER(S) : 32635 of 1995 JUDGMENT OF: Curtis J at 1 CATCHWORDS: Statutes & Delegated Legislation :- LEGISLATION CITED: s 145 Workers Compensation Act 1987 CASES CITED: DATES OF HEARING: 30 October 2001 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 10/30/2001

Mr T Edwards instructed by John Palmieri appeared for the first respondent LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Mr J Harris instructed by William Clinton appeared for the Workcover Authority of New South Wales

JUDGMENT: 1. An applicant worker, Anna Petersen, was employed by Charin Jaroenpon and Satcha Tansiri to work in a restaurant at Maitland. In the course of that employment she suffered injuries and brought a claim for compensation in this Court. At the time of her injuries the respondents were uninsured. In any event when the applicant's claim came on for hearing Mr Tansiri appeared through his solicitors as did the WorkCover Authority of New South Wales. On 7 September 1998 the applicant's claim was subject to a settlement in consequence of which Mr Tansiri consented to an award against him pursuant to which the applicant was to be paid $9,738.70 in respect of 10 per cent loss of efficient use of her right leg at or above the knee. 2. He also consented to pay to the applicant her costs which were in the order of, as I understand it, approximately $7,500. Short minutes of order were prepared to reflect this agreement. Those short minutes were signed by the counsel for WorkCover and for Mr Tansiri. An annexure to those short minutes is in the following terms: "Annexure A". 1. Declaration that first respondent (Satcha Tansiri) was not insured as required by the Act at the time of the worker's injury. 2. Order that the second respondent (WorkCover Authority of New South Wales) to cause payment of the award and costs awarded against the first respondent to be made out of the fund. 3. Order the first respondent to reimburse the second respondent such amount or amounts as may be paid out of the fund referred to in (2) above in respect of the compensation and costs awarded against the second respondent and in respect of the costs of the applicant. 3. WorkCover has now paid the award of compensation and costs to the applicant. 4. WorkCover on 26 October 2001 served upon Mr Tansiri a notice pursuant to s 145(1) of the Workers Compensation Act requiring that he pay within 28 days the sum of $18,411, being the award of compensation and costs. The quantum is not in dispute. By notice of motion Mr Tansiri seeks orders that this Court determine his liability under the Act to WorkCover. It is the contention of Mr Tansiri that any fault in relation to the failure to pay insurance was entirely the fault of his former partner who has since absconded and further that by reason of economic hardship he should be excused from paying the whole of the amount of the liability. It is contended that pursuant to s 145(4) this Court has power to make the orders that he seeks. The Legislation 5. S 145 of the Act is in the following terms: (1) The authority may serve on a person who in the opinion of the authority was - a) In respect of an injured worker to or in respect of whom a payment has been made under the scheme, an employer at the relevant time; or b) An insurer under this Act of such an employer, on notice requiring that person within a period specified in the notice, to reimburse WorkCover Authority Fund an amount (not being an amount exceeding the amount of the payment made) specified in the notice.