T&M Industries (Aust) Pty Ltd & Anor v WorkCover Authority of NSW (Insp Sequeira) [2005] NSWIRComm 242

Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales in Court Session

CITATION: T&M Industries (Aust) Pty Ltd & Anor v WorkCover Authority of NSW (Insp Sequeira) [2005] NSWIRComm 242

First Appellant: T&M Industries (Aust) Pty Ltd PARTIES: Second Appellant: Terrence Roland Tisdale

FILE NUMBER(S): IRC6274 of 2003

CORAM: Kavanagh J

CATCHWORDS: OH&S - Application to vary Orders of Full Bench - granted

HEARING DATES: 07/13/2005 EXTEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 07/13/2005

Appellants: Mr B. Camilleri, Barrister & Solicitor

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Respondent: Ms P. Lowson of counsel Solicitors: Ms R. Sutton Moray & Agnew

JUDGMENT:

- 4 - INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES IN COURT SESSION CORAM: KAVANAGH J

13 July 2005

IRC6274 of 2003 T&M INDUSTRIES (AUST) PTY LTD AND ANOR v WORKCOVER AUTHORITY OF NSW (INSPECTOR SEQUEIRA) Application for leave to appeal and appeal against the decision and orders of Magistrate Maughan given on 9 September 2003 and 13 October 2003 in matter Nos 20242200/02/2, 20242226/02/2, 20242234/02/2 and 20242253/02/2 EX TEMPORE INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT (on delegation) [2005] NSWIRComm242 1 The parties come before me given the appellants have applied for a variation of the Orders of the Full Bench of 16 May 2005. 2 The procedure followed by the appellants for this variation application is in accordance with that outlined in the Interlocutory Judgment of the Full Bench of 16 May 2005. 3 The appellants tender a proposed Draft Order varying the timetable set by the Full Bench in preparation of appeal. 4 The respondent generally neither consents nor opposed the Draft Order except as to one draft order related to the issuing of summonses. 5 However, at the hearing, the court pointed out to the parties there had been no compliance with conditions set by the Full Bench related to the stay and to placing the first respondent back on the record. The $10,000 has not been paid into Court as security for costs from the appellants and as was conceded the re-registration application for the re-registering of the first appellant has not been filed. 6 After hearing submissions from the parties, I give the following Orders: 1. I extend the Stay granted by Walton J, Vice President to 4pm on 18 July 2005. 2. The second appellant is to pay into court the sum of $10,000 by 4 pm 15 July 2005 as security for the respondent's costs of the appeal. 3. (i) The second appellant is to take all steps necessary to achieve the re-registration of the first appellant to be effected on or before 4pm on 9 September 2005 so as to enable it to prosecute it's appeal; (ii) A report back regarding the re-registration of the second appellant is listed before me for 9.30 am 14 September 2005. 4. The timetable for the preparation of the Appeal as set out in Orders 2(i), 2(ii) and 2 (iii) made on 16 May 2005 be set said. I give the following orders: The appellants file and serve on or before 4 pm on 1 September 2005: (i) Submissions and Chronology, (ii) Any application to amend the Appeal by way of Notice of Motion, (iii) Any application to adduce fresh evidence (including an affidavit in support of the application and an outline of the grounds relied upon for the application). 5. The appellants have leave to issue Summonses for Production on the respondent by 20 July 2005 to be returnable before me at 10 am on 27 July 2005. 6. Any further application by the appellants to vary the Orders 2,3,4 shall be made at least 7 days prior to the compliance dates (that is, the dates referred to in Orders 2,3 and 4 above) and shall be accompanied by an undertaking to pay the respondent's actual costs of the said application. 7. In the event the appellants fail to comply with any requirement in Orders 2,3 and 4 above, without having any variation to those orders as provided for in accordance with Order 4, the court makes the following self-executing orders: (i) the appeal is dismissed;